The Armour Archive

In the recent discussion about round shields, someone mentioned that half-swording is legal now. What rule was changed to allow half-swording? I am interested in learning from this style. My question is this, what period techiques with the half-sword would not be legal/safe within the SCA (like striking with the pommel or quillions)? If one made quillions out of rattan and then placed thrusting tips on the ends, would you think it would be legal? Just a few thoughts and curious about what you all think.

Bjørn av Trollfjorden

Bjørn wrote:In the recent discussion about round shields, someone mentioned that half-swording is legal now. What rule was changed to allow half-swording?
Bjørn av Trollfjorden

I'm not the person to answer the last half of your question Bjorn, but Half-Swording became legal on a society level a year or so ago. However, it is not legal in all kingdoms so check with your kingdoms marshalate to find out how it applies to you.

Regards,
Ulrich

The particular rule is:

2. The blade of an opponent’s weapon may not be grasped at any time, nor may it be trapped in contact with the fighter’s body as a means of preventing the opponent’s use of the weapon. Armored hands may grasp the haft of an opponent’s weapon.

This implies strongly that one's own blade may be grasped.

You can half-sword, that is grab your own blade, not your opponents. You cannot strike with quillons or pommel. I think thrusting points on quillons in SCA combat would look pretty goofy because of how big they have to be.

yep. i've got the rule changes around here somewhere, but basically you may grasp the blade of your own weapon.

this basically turns the greatsword into a mini-pole. now you can better direct a thrust in close, tip slash and deliver a killing blow by 'cross checking' your opponent with the portion of the blade between your hands.

just something else to get used to.

You could also stab with the "buttspike", if legal, but not use it like a mace to smash.

I've always thought you could get one of David Rath's double axe heads and use them as striking quillions.

Some marshals don't like "strongly implied".

The last event I went to most fighters did not know what half-sword was. I cannot remember if the marshal did or not.

I was told not to do it since the practice was in doubt.

Vladimir wrote:Some marshals don't like "strongly implied".

The last event I went to most fighters did not know what half-sword was. I cannot remember if the marshal did or not.

I was told not to do it since the practice was in doubt.

I ran into that some years back: "I think it's unchivalrous so you can't do it at my practice."

And... Looking at the online Marshals Handbook (August 2006) and the updates (December 2006) I see that grasping the blade of your own weapon is no longer prohibited. So I'd say that if your kingdom rules don't prohibit it you're okay. If they don't know what it is, show them and let them make their own judgement on utility.

I've always thought you could get one of David Rath's double axe heads and use them as striking quillions.

You and me both, of course I'd add on a small macehead/kong for pommel strikes as well.

-+G

I made a matched set of halfswords for a recent tournament. They worked well but most people ended up just using them as polearms.
[img]http://home.armourarchive.org/members/winter/armour/halfsword3.JPG[/img]

[img]http://home.armourarchive.org/members/winter/armour/halfsword.jpg[/img]

They have mandrake tips on both ends and foam quillions with padding.

I got to get a couple of those mandrake thrusters.

"David Rath's double axe heads " ????

pics please

Worst idea ever. It would cause nothing but issues in battle.

Winterfell wrote:I made a matched set of halfswords for a recent tournament. They worked well but most people ended up just using them as polearms.

They look like full swords to me.

Its a needed technique to make longsword vs random weapon a viable choice.

Sir Wilhelm vonOstenbruke wrote:Worst idea ever. It would cause nothing but issues in battle.

How so?

Sir Wilhelm vonOstenbruke wrote:Worst idea ever. It would cause nothing but issues in battle.

I do not see how. It is not any different than choking up on a spear or polearm.
If I were to bring a great sword to a battle, it would allow me to have a better control of it like a spear in close presses.

Sir Wilhelm vonOstenbruke wrote:Worst idea ever. It would cause nothing but issues in battle.

How so? This isn't any different than choking up on a spear or polearm.

Sir Wilhelm vonOstenbruke wrote:Worst idea ever. It would cause nothing but issues in battle.

Seriously, why do you feel that way (unless you mean using double axe heads as quillons, in which case I agree with you)?

Being able to hold your own sword blade has strong historical precedence. From a safety point of view, it is in many ways safer than using a polearm since your lower hand has extra protection from the quillons. From a game play standpoint of safety issues for your opponent, unless we start allowing pommel and quillon strikes I don't see it as more dangerous.

It certainly does help with defense in some cases.

All in all a win win. Do you have specific objections?

And having something cause issues in battle has never stopped the SCA from doing something. If it did, combat archery would have been banned a long time ago

Check your local rules before building a set. I just checked, and NO sword in Meridies can have a butt-spike. Hate to build something and then cant use it.

Sorry, I should have clarified. I was in a hurry when I replied. The part I don't like is the using of a butt spike and being able to hit with the cross guard on great swords. In melee I just see this causing nothing but issues and complaints. People have a hard enough time recognizing some shots as it is without adding in some new if not odd striking edges. Tourney I see no problems. Ehh maybe it's just me.

Yup Wilhelm.....

It's just you...

If the blade of a greatsword can be grasped, what the purpose of limiting the length of the grip to eighteen inches?

Because if it has a 3' handle its not really a greatsword is it?

Magnus The Black wrote:Because if it has a 3' handle its not really a greatsword is it?

If I can grab the blade 18" above the quillion then it has a 3' handle. Savvy?

Skutai wrote:If the blade of a greatsword can be grasped, what the purpose of limiting the length of the grip to eighteen inches?

Why would I need more grip area, it would look a bit silly.

Skutai wrote:If I can grab the blade 18" above the quillion then it has a 3' handle. Savvy?

Oh I understand what you’re saying but the fact is a "greatsword" doesn't have a 3' handle. Grabbing a blade with a hand doesn't change it into a handle it just means you’re holding onto a blade. It may offer all the advantages of a handle (well not really it can be quite awkward sometimes) but you can still use that portion as a blade if need be.

The fact is its a club masquerading as a greatsword in our game which has convenient rule sets that define weapons. Halfswording though is a documentable style to the period and culture we are playing at in SCA combat.

If a sword with a 3' handle is still a sword, is a spear with a 6" handle still a spear?

Sir Wilhelm vonOstenbruke wrote:Sorry, I should have clarified. I was in a hurry when I replied. The part I don't like is the using of a butt spike and being able to hit with the cross guard on great swords. In melee I just see this causing nothing but issues and complaints. People have a hard enough time recognizing some shots as it is without adding in some new if not odd striking edges. Tourney I see no problems. Ehh maybe it's just me.

Ah. Well, I don't think getting pommeled would be much different than getting thrusted with a butt spike from a polearm. The quillions might be a problem in the sense that if you hit with the grip instead or the flat of the quillons accidentally, I guess it would be considered 'flat/no good' but the opponent might not realize it, especially in melee. But we already have that problem with axes and blades/hafts on polearms.

Interesting points though.

Skutai wrote:If the blade of a greatsword can be grasped, what the purpose of limiting the length of the grip to eighteen inches?

So it does not look stupid? So it looks more authentic?

Seriously, the original idea I think (many different answers on this one from old timers) was to limit how hard you could hit with the thing and not create great swords with huge blocking areas below the hilt either.

Speaking to the first, excessive force is in my opinion best avoided through training, not through weapons design limitations in many cases. Though excessively long grips do often look stupid.

Richard Blackmoore wrote:

Skutai wrote:If the blade of a greatsword can be grasped, what the purpose of limiting the length of the grip to eighteen inches?

So it does not look stupid? So it looks more authentic?

I'm not advocating changing anything about the current rules concerning greatswords, just asking what I think are fairly obvious questions.

Is the grip now just for show? Is there a minimum grip length or can I wield essentially a bladed stick, like an unpadded polearm with the blade running all the way down?

I think it's a fine rule, and used it myself as soon as I heard about it. It's just a bit vague in the context of the current greatsword rules.

Skutai wrote:

Richard Blackmoore wrote:

Skutai wrote:If the blade of a greatsword can be grasped, what the purpose of limiting the length of the grip to eighteen inches?

So it does not look stupid? So it looks more authentic?

I'm not advocating changing anything about the current rules concerning greatswords, just asking what I think are fairly obvious questions.

Is the grip now just for show? Is there a minimum grip length or can I wield essentially a bladed stick, like an unpadded polearm with the blade running all the way down?

I think it's a fine rule, and used it myself as soon as I heard about it. It's just a bit vague in the context of the current greatsword rules.

Oh I agree, I was just kidding. That is why my next sentence began with "Seriously".

The problem with SCA rules, is that we don't update the complete set and keep the various rules in sync with each other logically. We tend to change a rule, which might make perfect sense for the great swords, but then seems odd when you look at say the polearm rules.

Hence the rise of the out of period peasant weapon stupid Madus. Does it make any sense, work against armour if it were real or belong in knightly combat? No. Does it work great for rules lawyers who want to take advantage of the SCA rules system for maximum effect? Sure. While I don't want the same thing to happen to great swords and long swords, I too like half sword techniques, provided they can be done safely.