New Gleann Abhann war rule.

[D. Sebastian]

No sir, I don't like it.
I don't like it at all.

Hope it dies on the vine.


(2 thumbs down and a long raspberry)

[Kilkenny]

...but for the most part, we're all ok with dem furriners doin it. Yall just weird, thassal...

who are YOU calling "Dem Furriners"


Seriously though, I can see the point the EM of Glenn Ahbann is trying to make. It is the same that has been hashed out here on this forum time and again. If you got sliced in the thigh hard enough to "cut through chainmaille" whether or not you would be dead, you would be incapacitated from continuing to fight over terrain.

My question is this. If said fighters of GA are no longer allowed to hobble/crawl around on their knees, will they be allowed to sit up on their knees when engaged? Or must they sit on their feet when engaged?

To my eyes if you can't crawl around you can't sit up on your knees and throw shots either. Both requiring the use of the thigh muscles that are supposed to be incapacitated. To allow one with out the other seems silly and weakens the point of the Marshal to make such a fighting convention.

At which point you should simply leave the field as you are "dead" for all purposes. If we can't throw blows (and likewise cannot block, presumably) then there simply is no point to being there.

I don't think the rule change makes much sense. I would expect in short order the main effect of such a rule would be that legged fighters would depart the field earlier than they might have otherwise.

What does one do when the melee comes down to one from each side, both legged and out of range of one another ?

Have there been problems of some sort (beyond a perceived "realism" issue) that are being addressed by this rule change ?

Gavin

[blackbow]

Hear! Hear! for Gaston's suggestion.

If you want to be realistic than the only option is to dump the whole fighting form your knees convention.

I we are going to play at sport with rules to govern "combat" then we need to get rid of the idea of realism- there is none. Arrows aren't nuclear and blows don't necessarily kill in one shot. If hit anywhere on the leg, you wouldn't just drop to your knees and keep going- we aren't mechs with leg armor points.

Making people unable to move on their knees in combat makes the game silly, and impractical if all that is left on the field are a bunch of guys who can't move to fight one another.

Alaric

Another alternative to 3 telling blows is that if you receive a telling blow on your leg, you can't run any more. If you receive a second telling blow to the leg, you're done.

Regards,

Jonathan Blackbow

[Ldy Wu]

I second that raspberry, Sebastian, and add to it.

But after all, her Majesty did say it was an experiment, and it would not be in effect for Gulf Wars. I say experiment away and if they can find a way to do it so as to not alienate a bunch of fighters, then it was a successful experiment.

Althought, I do think it is good that the new GA KEM is a doctor. Saves time.

[blackbow]

...but for the most part, we're all ok with dem furriners doin it. Yall just weird, thassal...

who are YOU calling "Dem Furriners"


Seriously though, I can see the point the EM of Glenn Ahbann is trying to make. It is the same that has been hashed out here on this forum time and again. If you got sliced in the thigh hard enough to "cut through chainmaille" whether or not you would be dead, you would be incapacitated from continuing to fight over terrain.

My question is this. If said fighters of GA are no longer allowed to hobble/crawl around on their knees, will they be allowed to sit up on their knees when engaged? Or must they sit on their feet when engaged?

To my eyes if you can't crawl around you can't sit up on your knees and throw shots either. Both requiring the use of the thigh muscles that are supposed to be incapacitated. To allow one with out the other seems silly and weakens the point of the Marshal to make such a fighting convention.

At which point you should simply leave the field as you are "dead" for all purposes. If we can't throw blows (and likewise cannot block, presumably) then there simply is no point to being there.

I don't think the rule change makes much sense. I would expect in short order the main effect of such a rule would be that legged fighters would depart the field earlier than they might have otherwise.

What does one do when the melee comes down to one from each side, both legged and out of range of one another ?
Gavin

Per the book "Armor" ca. 1965, at one point the Greeks fought each other wearing practically no armor at all, standing behind a HEAVY body shield (possibly as much as 200 lbs), armed with a spear, and would shout insults at each other until one became too tired to yell.

Documentation on request.

Regards.

Jonathan Blackbow

[white mountain armoury]

Id like some documentation on that 200 lb shield

[Vitus von Atzinger]

The idea of a 200 pound shield is insane. The documentation was a typo- they meant 20 pounds. Even that is suspect.

[blackbow]

If it had been a typo I don't think they'd have gone on about it for a paragraph or more. I'll copy the passage out of the book and put it up here when I get home.

Regards

JB

[Ceddie]

The idea of a 200 pound shield is insane. The documentation was a typo- they meant 20 pounds. Even that is suspect.

I use a 200lb shield all the time, I call him squire!!!

[white mountain armoury]

If it had been a typo I don't think they'd have gone on about it for a paragraph or more. I'll copy the passage out of the book and put it up here when I get home.

Regards

JB

Please do, im interested in reading it, i cant for a second think that whom ever wrote the passage had a clue, but im wrong more than im right.

[Johan_Fitztomas]

Ceddie Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 7:28 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vitus von Atzinger wrote:
The idea of a 200 pound shield is insane. The documentation was a typo- they meant 20 pounds. Even that is suspect.


I use a 200lb shield all the time, I call him squire!!!

Hey! Are you refering to me? then get it right 300lb!

Johan Fitztomas
The shield of Ceddie

[David S]

I always assumed that fighting in the SCA was supposed to represent a tournament context, rather than an actual war. Not that I have much SCA experience (I've only been to two fighter practices), but it seems to me that SCA heavy (or rapier) combat is, 'in-game', a sporting competition, not a role-playing battle. At least, that's the way I have come into it. I don't mean, by that viewpoint, to take away from those who want rattan fighting to be their combat simulation, but the realism can only extend so far when you're not trying to actually kill eachother. Even "Ultimate" Fighting is not real fighting, when you get down to it--it's not a real fight if there are rules.

As someone with a lot of experience in a boffer sport that is very similar to SCA heavy combat (really! No character classes or magic beanbags or anything!) and shares the same 'fighting from the knees' rule (in that it's what happens when you receive a good leg hit), I feel that taking this rule out of SCA rattan combat won't really do anyone any good. While I am getting into SCA combat in the interests of greater realism (as opposed to boffer fighting, which is fun in its own right, but very few people take their garb, or even character names, seriously), I feel that realism should take a back seat to playability, and that both should defer to safety. Obviously, fighting from the knees is unrealistic. But is it particularly unsafe? Does it cause any major gameplay problems? If those are both 'no,' I can't see any reason why it would need to be done away with.

[dukelogan]

really?

ask your em if he is willing to fight me for real to test some of these idiotic ideas. like he can break my leg and see if i will sit on my knees while he tries to do whatever. im cool with trying it if hes willing to be shown as a fool.

listen, nothing we do in sca sport combat is close to real. but it is real for what we do. that said can we not let this be a sport of dominance and not one of sissy ass tag youre it conventions? im so glad i live in a kingdom that is immune to this stuff. at least for now (our em is a little out of it from what ive heard lately).

regards
logan

Before this erupts into too much contention, I have it on very good authority that:

1. Yes, this rule was intended to make the combat more realistic (our current EM is a medical doctor and advocate of more realistic combat practices).
2. Yes, it is currently under review and may not be a permanent change to our conventions.
3. No, this will not be in effect at Gulf Wars.

Broinnfinn
Regina Gleann Abhann and Very Good Authority (TM)

[blackbow]

sorry - the bad news is I had a pc call last night and didn't get in until about 9 and brain-farted. the good news is I made a decent chunk of change off of it. The bad news is I've got another one tonight. The good news is it shouldn't take long. I'll email myself to remember to grab the book and copy the relevant passages.

JB

[Marvin]

With all due respect, this is flawed logic.

Making rules regarding whether or not someone can walk around on one's knees like a drunk, armored frat boy has absolutely nothing at all to do with whether this is a "sport of dominance" or "one of sissy ass tag youre it conventions".

I would probably be safe in saying that Sir William has forgotten more about the traumatic effects of injury to the body that you, me or 99% of the people that read this are ever likely to learn. I would be stunned if he regarded this rule as creating anything resembling realism - only that it's slightly more realistic than the current rule.

really?

ask your em if he is willing to fight me for real to test some of these idiotic ideas. like he can break my leg and see if i will sit on my knees while he tries to do whatever. im cool with trying it if hes willing to be shown as a fool.

listen, nothing we do in sca sport combat is close to real. but it is real for what we do. that said can we not let this be a sport of dominance and not one of sissy ass tag youre it conventions? im so glad i live in a kingdom that is immune to this stuff. at least for now (our em is a little out of it from what ive heard lately).

regards
logan

[Ceddie]

Making rules regarding whether or not someone can walk around on one's knees like a drunk, armored frat boy has absolutely nothing at all to do with whether this is a "sport of dominance" or "one of sissy ass tag youre it conventions".

It also has nothing to do with reality. What I see it as being is one person (or a group of people, I really don't know) making a change in the rules to make the game playability what they want.
If Gleann Abhann wants to do this, great! In my opinion, it isolates and to a degree, alienates them from those around them. It in effect says “we are all playing the same game but our rules are better, more real than yours.â€Â

[Magnus The Black]

oh boy

[dukelogan]

i agree that a good number of our rules are far from realistic. my point is that we have created a very unique set of conditions. one of those conditions involves things like being hit in the leg causes the penalty of having to fight from your knees. has nothing to do with the reality of a tournament setting im sure.

if the argument were made that in a european tournament during the middle ages it can be assumed that a strike to the leg hard enough to break it would probably be cause for someone to yeild the fight, i would be ok with that reasoning. i just hate when we try to validate rule changes based on assumptions like when it is suggested that a mere touch to the face with a thrust would make someone unable to continue a fight.

we seem to create new rules at the drop of a hat and i find most of them hard to understand. if we could please just worry about changing rules when they are required for the safety of the participants i bet most of us would be happy.

if sir williams intent was not to suggest that a person would be unable to continue a fight from a leg injury i apologize for mis-understanding.

regards
logan

With all due respect, this is flawed logic.

Making rules regarding whether or not someone can walk around on one's knees like a drunk, armored frat boy has absolutely nothing at all to do with whether this is a "sport of dominance" or "one of sissy ass tag youre it conventions".

I would probably be safe in saying that Sir William has forgotten more about the traumatic effects of injury to the body that you, me or 99% of the people that read this are ever likely to learn. I would be stunned if he regarded this rule as creating anything resembling realism - only that it's slightly more realistic than the current rule.

really?

ask your em if he is willing to fight me for real to test some of these idiotic ideas. like he can break my leg and see if i will sit on my knees while he tries to do whatever. im cool with trying it if hes willing to be shown as a fool.

listen, nothing we do in sca sport combat is close to real. but it is real for what we do. that said can we not let this be a sport of dominance and not one of sissy ass tag youre it conventions? im so glad i live in a kingdom that is immune to this stuff. at least for now (our em is a little out of it from what ive heard lately).

regards
logan

[Marvin]

I can't seem to channel Sir William today, but I'll do my best.

My best guess is that William thinks knee fighting is silly and that knee walking is sillier still. I regard it as an incremental change for the better, but nowhere near as far as I would like to see it go. However, I'm not the EM and I don't have to balance my preferences with pragmatism.

I read your initial post to imply that for some reason the 'plant' rule made our fighting 'sissy'. You also seemed to say that Sir William was being a fool for instituting it. If that was not the intent, then I apologise for my misunderstanding as well. I can see that your gripe is more about rule-changing in general.

i agree that a good number of our rules are far from realistic. my point is that we have created a very unique set of conditions. one of those conditions involves things like being hit in the leg causes the penalty of having to fight from your knees. has nothing to do with the reality of a tournament setting im sure.

if the argument were made that in a european tournament during the middle ages it can be assumed that a strike to the leg hard enough to break it would probably be cause for someone to yeild the fight, i would be ok with that reasoning. i just hate when we try to validate rule changes based on assumptions like when it is suggested that a mere touch to the face with a thrust would make someone unable to continue a fight.

we seem to create new rules at the drop of a hat and i find most of them hard to understand. if we could please just worry about changing rules when they are required for the safety of the participants i bet most of us would be happy.

if sir williams intent was not to suggest that a person would be unable to continue a fight from a leg injury i apologize for mis-understanding.

regards
logan

[carlyle]

Marvin: "I would be stunned if he regarded this rule as creating anything resembling realism"

Stunned or not, it is the one-and-only reason for the rule offered "on very good authority" in Bri's post.

Logan: "if sir williams intent was not to suggest that a person would be unable to continue a fight from a leg injury i apologize for mis-understanding."

I inferred from the information posted so far that, to the GA EM, fighting immobile from the knees was deemed more "real" than fighting and crawling on your knees. Both conditions are, in fact, totally unreal. There is no historical evidence anywhere of a wounded fighter offering a credible defense in armored combat from his knees -- let alone to the point of victory over his more mobile and upright aggressor. It is a conceit of our Play; I would hope that an experienced MD would be able to discern as much.

With respect,

Alfred of Carlyle

[Marvin]

Our beer is better too!

Which kingdoms should we be in continuity with? Ansteorra, who has a similar rule? Or should we be more in line with Meridies and Calontir who do not? Maybe we could put it to a vote...

Sorry, feeling like a smartass today. It's the cold medicine talking.

Every kingdom has funny rules and conventions. Part of the fun of the SCA (well, at least to me...) is trying them out when you travel. I honestly do not see how trying out a new rule that may or may not (depending on who you ask) be more realistic could be construed as insulting to those who do not want to play be that rule.

[quote="Ceddie"]
It also has nothing to do with reality. What I see it as being is one person (or a group of people, I really don't know) making a change in the rules to make the game playability what they want.
If Gleann Abhann wants to do this, great! In my opinion, it isolates and to a degree, alienates them from those around them. It in effect says “we are all playing the same game but our rules are better, more real than yours.â€Â

[Saint-Sever]

I would hope that an experienced MD would be able to discern as much.

With respect,

Alfred of Carlyle

An MD is not likely, IMO, to be more than academically aware of what human beings are capable of immediately following massive trauma. Even ER docs see their most of their patients 20-30 minutes after the injury has occurred.

Ask a cop, firefighter or combat medic what people are routinely capable of after severe wounding. The answer might surprise you-- it would be an argument more in favor of not acting wounds out all.

I personally have no real beef with the knees rule in SCA fighting. It may look somewhat silly, but it is a pretty effective tool in our sport, requiring a care for one's defense and giving an advantage for a successful attack.

M.

[dukelogan]

yes, my gripe is about rule changing without reason. if william thinks its silly then he shouldnt do it. he has that option. gets hit in the leg and yields. if that is the reason he is thinking of outlawing it i am glad i dont live under that authority. if tis for safety reasons that can be supported then im all for it. if its an attempt at realism it is far from where we should begin (we should begin with throwing harder blows). no slight intended on sir william of GA at all though. thanks for letting me clarify that.

regards
logan

I can't seem to channel Sir William today, but I'll do my best.

My best guess is that William thinks knee fighting is silly and that knee walking is sillier still. I regard it as an incremental change for the better, but nowhere near as far as I would like to see it go. However, I'm not the EM and I don't have to balance my preferences with pragmatism.

I read your initial post to imply that for some reason the 'plant' rule made our fighting 'sissy'. You also seemed to say that Sir William was being a fool for instituting it. If that was not the intent, then I apologise for my misunderstanding as well. I can see that your gripe is more about rule-changing in general.

i agree that a good number of our rules are far from realistic. my point is that we have created a very unique set of conditions. one of those conditions involves things like being hit in the leg causes the penalty of having to fight from your knees. has nothing to do with the reality of a tournament setting im sure.

if the argument were made that in a european tournament during the middle ages it can be assumed that a strike to the leg hard enough to break it would probably be cause for someone to yeild the fight, i would be ok with that reasoning. i just hate when we try to validate rule changes based on assumptions like when it is suggested that a mere touch to the face with a thrust would make someone unable to continue a fight.

we seem to create new rules at the drop of a hat and i find most of them hard to understand. if we could please just worry about changing rules when they are required for the safety of the participants i bet most of us would be happy.

if sir williams intent was not to suggest that a person would be unable to continue a fight from a leg injury i apologize for mis-understanding.

regards
logan

[Morgan]

Ansteorrans CAN move when legged in melee. Just not via knee walking. We're supposed to use our hands and kind of crawl along.

It's also fairly silly, IMHO.

If realism is the goal, then why not eliminate the know "dropping to the knees" thing entirely? It's terribly unrealistic and just plain silly.

[Thorstenn]

Killing somebody with a single handed sword to the side of the helmet is just as silly. Please try to remember that armor was created to stop wounds or death from occurring in battle.
As far as face thrusts go, it takes MORE skill to touch to the face than to slam somebody.

[Vebrand]

The reason is culture and history. We have been fighting from or knees so long people can't seem to break themselves from it. The way change in the SCA happens and has always happened for the past 20 plus years is one Kingdom experiments with something and likes it. Other Kingdoms see this and adopt it and thus it becomes an SCA rule change. Sometimes rules are changed from the top down but most things are changed from the bottom up.

If one Kingdom stopped dropping to their knees and instead planted their foot (Avalon rule in Japan) and others liked it then it would be common. People would accept it and learn to play that way. I think that rule is as great if not a greater penalty as our current rule for tourney fighting.

It is an experiment and whether you agree with it or not it is just that an experiment. It may work and it may not. Until they have played with it for a while who knows. Personally I hate knee walking. I have bad knees and it kills me to do so. So I move a little but not much as it is. In the end it is a GA rule and though I have squires and friends in GA it is for them to decide and I have no real say one way or another.

Vebrand

[carlyle]

SS: "An MD is not likely, IMO, to be more than academically aware of what human beings are capable of immediately following massive trauma."

The implication is that a trained MD with extensive SCA experience could have an insight into how our simulation might approximate or deviate from actual practice. I will not debate this premise. Yet given even this much, it should not require 6 years of advanced study to realize that medeival combat was not conducted from the knees, or that any effort at making the tactic more "real" is little more than an adventure in fantasy.

SS: "The answer might surprise you-- it would be an argument more in favor of not acting wounds out all."

You're preaching to the choir. This is why I am such a strong advocate of counted blows. Whereas there is no evidence for acted blows, the accounts are rich with fights determined when the cumulative damage exceeded the combatant's ability to continue. Until that time, the fighters fought with all their limbs and faculties intact. And while we are unable to represent subtleties like stunned and weakened limbs, being blinded in one eye, or the heroic stamina that allows a mortally wounded man to fight on despite his wounds; counted blows/cumulative damage more closely approximates what might have happened than crawling around on your knees or fighting with your hand behind your back ever can.

SS: "I personally have no real beef with the knees rule in SCA fighting. It may look somewhat silly, but it is a pretty effective tool in our sport, requiring a care for one's defense and giving an advantage for a successful attack."

Fighting from the knees certainly requires a unique set of skills, valid within the context of the Play and prized by those who would be successful at the sport. I would argue, however, that it only serves to distract us from developing even more terrifying and skillful tactics that more closely resemble historic practice. For every new way you may discover to better defend or attack from your knees, couldn't that same time and effort be spent honing your upright fighting talent? Unless, of course, you feel you've achieved your full potential in that category .

With kindness,

Alfred of Carlyle

[Ceddie]

Which kingdoms should we be in continuity with? Ansteorra, who has a similar rule? Or should we be more in line with Meridies and Calontir who do not? Maybe we could put it to a vote

The more we deviate from a standard rule set the more we open ourselves to confusion, misunderstanding and hard feelings. If you play baseball in Tenn. and you move to Tokyo, it’s still the same game (with the exception of the DH but I think that’s dumb too).

Sorry, feeling like a smartass today. It's the cold medicine talking.

As long as you understand that I posted pre-coffee

Every kingdom has funny rules and conventions. Part of the fun of the SCA (well, at least to me...) is trying them out when you travel. I honestly do not see how trying out a new rule that may or may not (depending on who you ask) be more realistic could be construed as insulting to those who do not want to play be that rule.

See above for my thoughts about differing rules.
The reason has changed during the life of this thread from “It’s more realisticâ€Â

[carlyle]

Vebrand: "Sometimes rules are changed from the top down but most things are changed from the bottom up."

YOWSER!! Your Excellency, with all due respect, this is so wrong on so many levels I don't know where to begin!! Yes, this is often the appearance of how something happens at a kingdom level, but it in no way reflects how changes are instituted at the Society level that are then expected to be adopted by all kingdoms. Finger gauntlets, hardwood spears, padded/unpadded polearms, arming the elbow inside the shield, "directed touch" -- the list is endless, and all are the result of a SEM influenced by a small portion of the fighting community, usually from his own kingdom, and even more likely from his own cadre. We are an autocratic society at every point; we are a failure as a "grass roots"-driven culture.

It may only be an experiment, and it may be a GA thing now -- but woe betide us all should it be adopted on the premise of being "more realistic", and then, when a GA SEM is appointed, he decides that such a "sensible" rule should be adopted Society-wide. At this point, I'm beginning to wonder who protects us from our well-intended EM's ...

With kindness,

Alfred of Carlyle

[jester]

[quote="Ceddie"]The reason has changed during the life of this thread from “It’s more realisticâ€Â

[Ceddie]

Unless there is some great outcry against 'knee-walking' or a pattern of injury, why mess with it? In truth, I'd like to see knee-fighting go away ( I have fought with the Avalon rules in a small tourney and I liked it a lot). I know change comes from experimentation but this seems like an odd windmill to tilt.

[St. George]

If someone wants to be prgressive, than they should be ballsy and dump fighting from the knees altogether. We all know it is a conceit of SCA fighting, so if someone really wants a move towards being realistic, than move towards being realistic, don't cower behind a rule change that makes combat "slighty more realistic, " because it still remains BS unrealistic, Monty Python fairy tale fighting with the rule change as stated.

I dare anyone to make a ruling on a kingdom or the society level that gets rid of "limb loss" and replaces it with counted blows.

Alaric

PS- all change in the SCA is autocratic, if some individual doesn't make a change (and usually take a hit of crap for it) it never happens.

PPS- Again we see specious changes to the rules coming out Meridies/Glenn Abhann. There is certainly a pattern to their deviancy from the rest of the SCA. Why do they appear to be so far out of whack from the rest of the culture?

[FrauHirsch]

I kind of like the concept of planting one's foot of a leg that was hit. The other addition could be to make a second shot to a planted leg a "kill".

Overall I've noticed a higher degree of micromanagement lately from all levels of SCA "government".

Juliana

[Blackoak]

Thanks for the input guys. This is wierd for us, and while the experiment goes on, we will try to work out the kinks. Sir William is a good guy, and if it doesn't work I'm sure it will go back to normal.

The reason for this was not to have people rise against it, just input. So I hope this next question doesn't rile many up. Concerning what Duke Alaric said about SEM's making changes that affect the Society when a decision is made with limited input. How would we go about taking some of the authority from the SEM to prevent that? Maybe major rule changes need to be voted on by the different kingdom EM's? That way, all kingdom's have a voice in these major changes. Is there currently a way that the different kingdom EM's communicate? I for one am in favor of the play level, rules, callibration Society wide. Therefore, if they do not actively communicate (kindom EM's), I think they should. I think the more our kingdoms communicate, the more alike we might be.

Uric

[Morgan]

Well, in a number of threads where the autocratic rule by fiat decisions that have come out of the SEM's office have been discussed, what was largely opined by the majority was simply that the SEM should PROPOSE rule changes and put them out for COMMENTARY like the BOD does. Pretty simple. Not a great deal of need to "take power away" really.