Sword and Shield Boring?

[ThorvaldR Skegglauss]

Why do people find sword and shield boring?

I don't. I like to watch or fight a good sword and shield fight. Then again I don't believe in a static style of fighting either. There needs to be movement, agression, tactics and grace.

regards
ThorvaldR

[Mord]

Ya got me why folks find it boring.

Mord, who pretty much fights only Sword and Shield.

[James B.]

I find the lack of realism in how we portray the sword in SCA combat boring. Gives me no incentive to learn the domination styles or take up tournament fighting in the SCA.

[Aaron]

It can be exciting to watch sometimes. Two people of good skill doing just about anything is interesting.

[Seaan O'Hagan]

I got bored with it because it was the first form I was taught and I did it nearly exclusively for several years.

I don't pick it up much now (even though it is far and away my best form) because I really don't like the indestructable shield. I think it takes away some of the dangers that would have been faced against heavier weapons like axes and polearms.

[Eirik]

/chuckle In contrast, I have far too much to learn yet to find sword and shield boring


***ETA*** That sounds kind of snarky.... allow me to clarify, please.

I put down sword and shield almost imediately and fought pole exclusively for years and have come back to sword and shield....

Much better, I think.

[Ulric]

I got bored with it because it was the first form I was taught and I did it nearly exclusively for several years.

I don't pick it up much now (even though it is far and away my best form) because I really don't like the indestructable shield. I think it takes away some of the dangers that would have been faced against heavier weapons like axes and polearms.

What I don't like is that armour basically counts for nothing, yet a shield is an invulnerable barrier. Shields are tough to break...but so is armour

[muttman]

I don't find it boring to fight, especialy if I'm fighting a mobile fighter who uses good footwork. If its two fighters fighting and using good footwork and mobility I don't find it boring to watch either. OTOH if its a couple of fat guys rushing straight at eachother like a couple of charging rhinos, whaling away with wraps and belly bumps then yes, I find it boring. I tend to find those guys boring to fight too, even if they beat me.

[Aaron]

Yeah, but in regards to armour and shields we could have a debate for months, going 15 pages, where we make insults to each other because the other person is obviously wrong, then someone would mention combat archery, knee fighting, etc...and we'd go at again for six months, and in summary we would basically say:

I like what I do. It would be nice if you liked what I do too.

Yes, if we did plate and mail as proof against swords, glaives, greatsword, etc...I would be very amused and the game would change a lot.

But the game is fun for many, and I should not **** on their fun, because that isn't fun.

Ya-all have fun now, ya-hear!
With respect,

-Aaron

[Seaan O'Hagan]

I am sorry if it came across that I was thinking of myself as some sort of uber-sowrdsman....I am not, not even close. All I was saying was that of my modest skillset, I am best with sword and shield. And it would be innacurate to say that I have come back to it, becasue I haven't. I don't currently own a shield or single handed sword. Like I said, I did it exclusively for quite some time, but got very bored with it.

/chuckle In contrast, I have far too much to learn yet to find sword and shield boring


***ETA*** That sounds kind of snarky.... allow me to clarify, please.

I put down sword and shield almost imediately and fought pole exclusively for years and have come back to sword and shield....

Much better, I think.

[Lucas]

I find it very interesting. As my best form, I enjoy trying to finish the fight mentally before it even starts. I enjoy manipulating my opponent into doing what I want.I enjoy pushing myself into a zone where I must defend and attack almost simultaneously. I enjoy faking my opponent into believing a blow is coming from one direction, and then hitting them really hard from another. Granted, that not specific to sword and shield.....

[Gregoire de Lyon]

...I really don't like the indestructable shield. I think it takes away some of the dangers that would have been faced against heavier weapons like axes and polearms.

The weight and mechanics of axes and polearms in the SCA are about as realistic as the nature of our shields, the knee fighting and everything else.

It is all a matter of taste in the end:
Either you like SCA fighting or you don't.
Either you like knee fighting or you don't.
Either you like sword and shield or you don't.
Either you like combat archery or you don't.

The keys are to remember that 1) if you don't likesomething, don't do it, and 2) just because someone else likes something that you don't like doesn't mean that they are wrong.

[Seaan O'Hagan]

I couldn't agree more. I had no intention of telling anyone else that they were wrong, just explaining why I find sword and shield boring. To me, personally, the shield issue is a big part of it. I meant absolutely no disparagement on those who like s&s.

...I really don't like the indestructable shield. I think it takes away some of the dangers that would have been faced against heavier weapons like axes and polearms.

The weight and mechanics of axes and polearms in the SCA are about as realistic as the nature of our shields, the knee fighting and everything else.

It is all a matter of taste in the end:
Either you like SCA fighting or you don't.
Either you like knee fighting or you don't.
Either you like sword and shield or you don't.
Either you like combat archery or you don't.

The keys are to remember that 1) if you don't likesomething, don't do it, and 2) just because someone else likes something that you don't like doesn't mean that they are wrong.

[Eirik]

Aye Sean! And I was contrasting the fact that I had fought pole for so long, while you fought S/S for a long time. We are weapon style opposites, and that likely is why I still find S/S interesting.

Make sense?

Not calling you out on your swordplay or implying anything other than where you fought S/S for a long time, I fought pole

[Theoderic]

There was a fight once where 2 people were using nicely painted shields, aluminium. After 4 hits to the shield they threw it to the side and continued to fight. They were stout shots and both were fighting with axes. After a few bouts they instinctively became wary of taking shots to the shield as well. They seemed to move with their bodies opposed to feet and the fight took on a whole new look. It was quite extraordinary to watch.

[Seaan O'Hagan]

Gotcha...

Aye Sean! And I was contrasting the fact that I had fought pole for so long, while you fought S/S for a long time. We are weapon style opposites, and that likely is why I still find S/S interesting.

Make sense?

Not calling you out on your swordplay or implying anything other than where you fought S/S for a long time, I fought pole

[Gregoire de Lyon]

I meant absolutely no disparagement on those who like s&s.

Sorry if I sounded snippy, I didn't think you were being disparaging. That was the universal "you, not the "you-you"

[Josh W]

Yeah, it's the indestructible shields and the "no shin strikes" rule that gives shields an unrealistic advantage in our game, and, IMO, winds up tilting things in favor of earlier personae from periods in which shields were dominant on the field among men of rank.

Now, it is fun to watch two highly-skilled, mobile, and energetic fighters play sword and shield, but in my experience such are the rare exception. Let's be honest with ourselves--many, many (if not most) SCA S&S bouts wind up as nothing but belly-to-belly wrap-shot throwing contests--unappealing (to me, anyway) in terms of both aesthetics and participation. Sword and buckler is more fun to watch and play because it requires more mobility and energy on the part of the combatants than fighting with two big heaters/kites/barndoors/etc.

I have no idea how the rules could possibly be altered to remedy things, but frankly, I am of the persuasion that, realistically, a man in a full harness of the best Italian/German steel plate circa 1475 armed with a poleaxe would easily utterly destroy a even the best-trained and best-equipped circa 1000 norseman/Irishman/etc with his spangenhelm, byrnie, shield, and sword.

Obviously, requiring the SCA rules to change to reflect my impressions of reality would tilt things in the direction of favoring late-period, heavily-armoured types, and would likely not be greeted with universal favor, but I do feel that the current ruleset favors the "viking age" folks too much, and I would like to someday see some sort of progress to even the playing field somewhat.

[Gorm]

Why do people find sword and shield boring?

Because, as a spectator, the typical fight looks like this:

"Lay on" is called, the two fighters stand there for a while, eventually they close a bit and assume a threatening posture. After a while, one swings, it is blocked. The other guy might swing, might not, it probably also gets blocked. Lather, rinse, repeat until one guy misses something and loses a limb.

Then we are either treated to a rapid conclusion (guy with no shield gets pummeled), or the glory of the fighting form known as KrotchFase (if the guy lost a leg).

There is no movement around the field. a 5x5 list would be adequate. There is no sense of flow to the fight, no sense of anything other than two guys pummeling each other's board until one makes a mistake.

And at Big tourney Finals level, that can be a while. I forget if it was 10 years ago or 11 when an Atlantian Crown was basically decided because one of the combatants just plain wore out (it was a long grueling tournament, on a warm day, as I recall) and was no longer capable of throwing a sufficient shot.

And yes, I know, *for the fighters* there is a *HELL* of a lot more going on, but virtually none of it comes across to the spectators standing on the sideline.

[Doorman]

I might be a new fighter but I do anything but stand still. I am constantly circling, stepping in and out and trying to make my opponent unbalance himself by crossing his feet. I am a big guy but I move very light on my feet. At least I move lightly for my size (340 lbs).

I use a shield that some say is too big but it is matched to my shoulder width. (30 inches for my shield, roughly the same width as my shoulders, maybe a little narrower.) I do my best not to hide behind my shield and actually avoid shots. I enjoy watching all sns fights.

I might enjoy high end sns bouts due to the high level of skill shown but I also enjoy the people down on my end of the skill spectrum. Watching high end fighters I don't get the chance to say "Oh, so that is what it looks like when I hold my shield wrong" because they don't hold their shield wrong. Watching a low end fighter I can see some of the same mistakes I make.

I have to admit though, the shield I am taking to War of the Wings can be called nothing but a door. It's a heater that is 36 inches wide by 44 inches tall I am bringing my barony's shield wall War sns should not factor into this equation though.

[muttman]

I am sorry if it came across that I was thinking of myself as some sort of uber-sowrdsman....I am not, not even close. All I was saying was that of my modest skillset, I am best with sword and shield. And it would be innacurate to say that I have come back to it, becasue I haven't. I don't currently own a shield or single handed sword. Like I said, I did it exclusively for quite some time, but got very bored with it.

/chuckle In contrast, I have far too much to learn yet to find sword and shield boring


***ETA*** That sounds kind of snarky.... allow me to clarify, please.

I put down sword and shield almost imediately and fought pole exclusively for years and have come back to sword and shield....

Much better, I think.

You are too humble my friend. As I recall your sword and shield was more than "modest". On top of that you were just plain a fun to fight with it though I'll admit that we had some real fun with those axes too!

[Count Johnathan]

Why do people find sword and shield boring?

I don't. I like to watch or fight a good sword and shield fight. Then again I don't believe in a static style of fighting either. There needs to be movement, agression, tactics and grace.

regards
ThorvaldR

I don't either. Some people however enjoy watching boxing while others enjoy MMA. They are both fighting but not everyone who likes fighting appreciates both.

In the SCA it seems like this question gets answered with a lot of responses that can be summarized with I don't understand it, I'm not good at it, or both.

People who think that it is mostly about belly bumping and throwing wraps have obviously not been exposed to much high level competition. I have seen very little of that belly bumping wrap throwing type of fighting around here anyway. We have a tendency to train newer fighters better than that. If it were all belly bumping and wraps that would be very boring to watch and to get involved in. Thankfully it's not, at least not in Atenveldt anyway.

[Dietrich von Stroheim]

I don't find sword and shield fighting to be boring at all.

There are no boring weapon forms, just boring people.

In Atlantia, the fighting is fast-paced, brutal, vigorous and exciting--whether at close quarters or at range. I don't think I've seen any of the agonizingly-long belly-to-belly flailing that others have described.

It's also a surprisingly-mental game--there is a lot that we do to 'outthink' as well as outfight our adversaries. For example some of my techniques plan out 3-4 blows in advance; I'll feign a face-thrust to bring the shield up then dive into a thumb-lead to flat snap to offside leg combo, expecting everything to be blocked/voided except that final leg blow.

Although my style is an active, footwork-intensive one, there is also nothing wrong with those who fight a static style successfully--this is a competitive sport we play and if that is what works for that person, they have every right to go ahead and do it!

[Aaron]

Sword and buckler vs the same is very beautiful to watch. There is a dance.

[Aaron]

"Fair" and "boring" have nothing to do with each other. Yes, IMO it is "unfair" that the armour doesn't count by the shield does. But most of life is unfair and no matter how we did things it would be unfair. If we did armour-as-worn, full-body-target with wrestling, and Josh or I stepped out there, do you think there would be comments that it is unfair to those dressed in less? Sword is ineffective everywhere BUT the eye slot and a 1.5 inch gap behind the knees where the mail brayette doesn't touch. Not terribly fair.

Sword and shield can be interesting at times to watch. But most of the time it just doesn't look right. Melees are interesting to watch. The Battle of 30 was very interesting to watch.

So if Duke X fights Duke Y in sword-and-shield, I'm prefer to watch something else, like the sunlight as it plays upon a child's face or how nice the grass was cut here.

If they are doing sword-and-buckler, they have my attention for a minute or less.

If they have their households behind them in a melee, they have my attention for five minutes.

If they are at the Battle of 30, I think they chose the wrong form to walk out there with.

[Angusm0628]

I never considered it boring, just not my favorite form to use. So I tend to neglect it and work on my pole and spear work...

[Magnus Ulfgarsson]

If you're from a place that really LOOOOVES its war, I imagine greatweapons are more prevalent, even in tournaments.

As far as realism, we play a very sporty game no matter what weapon you pick up.

Shins aren't legal targets, there's no grappling, no strikes, we drop to our knees comfortably when struck in the leg or fight with no issues with a mangled arm.

I think indestructible shields are the least of our realism worries.

[Magnus Ulfgarsson]

Sword and buckler vs the same is very beautiful to watch. There is a dance.

Hmmm... good point. I'd also put into this topic that I find tournament fighting with 2 very large shields boring to watch, but the smaller the shield gets the more entertaining it is for me.

[Adriano]

I don't find S&S boring. In fact I miss doing it. Used to use a 24" strapped round. If my left shoulder worked right, I'd make a new one of those and use it with an axe or a mace.

I'm thinking of trying a lightweight buckler.

[Count Johnathan]

It doesn't really matter what weapons are being used or how big the guys shields are.

It all boils down to the better the fighters the better the fight.

[freiman the minstrel]

After twenty something years, it can actually be tough to get your adrenaline up.

A few years ago, I heard somebody say "Same shit, different decade."

f

[spearweasel]

I'm primarily a polearm user, and in other rulesets, a shin-shot is a fine way to open up a shield user.

What is the rationale for no shins in the SCA?

Is it a fear of damage to the knees or ankles, due to the weight being carried by those joints?

Is it simply "unsporting"?

Do other rattan-based rule sets allow it safely?

None of this is intended rhetorically, I'm genuinely curious.

[Duke Areus]

I have found that, in my personal dealings, the majority of people that I have met who find Sword and shield "boring" are the ones who simply can't fight well, or at least can't fight S&S well.

And over75% of the time, the average S&S guy is better than they are in their preferred weapon style.

A lot of the complaining about S&S stems from the fact that upper echelon fighters tend for the most part to gravitate to it. It is therefore the natural reaction of those who are either physically incapable or just simply not willing to put in the hundreds and thousands of hours of training required to be in the top bracket, to dismiss the style as boring and unskilled.

If it S&S took no skill, there would be far more low level mediocre fighters wearing ducal coronets.

Just Sayin.

[Josh W]

I admit it up front: I suck at SCA sword and shield, and I probably always will. That doesn't bother me in the slightest. I don't want to waste my time in this game doing things that I don't find fun.

I am just not interested enough in the style, or any of the periods in which that style was commonly practiced to be bothered to muster the interest to become good at it; I sold my only shield (apart from a buckler) to a newbie a couple weeks ago. Now, things like bastard sword, single stick, polearm, sword and buckler--those are fast, mobile, fun to watch, and just all-around exhilarating; they appeal to me in a way that SCA sword and shield will never be able to. Best of all, they were common in the periods in which I am interested. Gentlemen did not often fight on foot with swords and shields in the late 15th century, AFAIK.

And nobody said the people who were good at it were unskilled by any means, but it is boring, especially when you're watching two huge guys in huge tunics with huge shields, behind which you can't see what's going on.

[Aaron]

Your Grace,

I would say that those who enter the finals for crown are usually fighting very boring fights. I've fought in one crown and was a spectator for two.

The early fights were brilliant, dynamic, colorful, cheerful and powerful.

The last fights were wait, wait, wait, snipe, wait, wait, THROW, THROW, THROW, back away, cock head, discuss the shot for a bit, wait, wait, wait...etc...

The first rounds were worth watching. The last rounds were worth looking for pick-up fights or off to see the A&S displays for excitement. So being a duke doesn't really equate IMO to being an exciting fighter, just a cautious one.

It comes down to two or more very skilled fighters waiting for the other to make a minor mistake. Like watching chess, but without the thrill.

But I've known many dukes who are wonderful people, but watching them fight sword-and-shield isn't exciting. Watching two or more (more is better) dukes fight with spear or polearm or greatsword is great entertainment. They move, they flow, they're dynamic, they spin, the footwork is graceful (pardon the pun) and it's exciting.

NOTE: I do not fight sword-and-shield due to wrist injuries from years of Judo, etc... So my frame of reference might be off. To quote Star Trek, the Voyage Home:

McCoy: C'mon, Spock, it's me, McCoy. You really have gone where no man's gone before. Can't you tell me what it felt like?
Spock: It would be impossible to discuss the subject without a common frame-of-reference.
McCoy: You're joking!
Spock: A joke
[pause]
Spock: is a story with a humorous climax.
McCoy: You mean I have to die to discuss your insights on death?
Spock: Forgive me, Doctor. I am receiving a number of distress calls.
McCoy: I don't doubt it.

-Aaron