The Armour Archive

How about something besides "I (fill in blank here)the SCA" for a change?

Like the subject says. I finally rotate out of Japan (5 years to long)back to the real world in the near future and would like to know is up with them. I have never even seen one.

I fight with a padded glaive with thrusty on a weekly basis and love going against all weapon combinations with it. However a recent post by someone regarding unpadded glaives caught me attention. The author said something like a padded glaive doesn't stand a chance against unpadded because of the speed difference. So what did they do?, allow people to put a piece of tape on a stick and call it a glaive? Wouldn't you really be using a quarterstaff then?

Opinions/comments?


[This message has been edited by Rainald (edited 01-09-2002).]

Have you ever seen a period glaive that had padding? I would think you would approve of the move to authenticity

hehehe...that was funny!

Yes, they allow you to tape up a stick and call it a glaive. Just like they allow you to tape up a stick and call it a sword. Or allow you to glue some shit on a stick and call it a mace.

It's like 1/2 a quarter staff...you're not allowed to hit with both ends.

------------------
"Be bold and mighty forces will come to your aid." -Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Morgan Buchanan
http://www.geocities.com/morgunnmac

Personally I believe polearms should have padding to make it look like what it's suppose to represent. Yes, we allow sticks to represent swords -but they are relatively close in wieght once you slap on a basket hilt, or crossguard/pummels.

A stick of rattan isn't even close to the wieght of a glaive or halberd.

unfortunatly, I was forced to go down to a 1/4 padded polearm because it is next to impossible to beat shieldmen without face thrusting. Now that we have face thrusting in the Middle Kingdom, everyone uses 1/4 padded polearms. If your only going to require 1/4 padding you might as well just go to unpadded -which they did last month.


In defence of the unpadded polearm I must say that it helps to balance the fact that polearm fighters can't chop shield to splinters. Since we can't chop through it, we'll just slap around it.

(^_^)

i THINK the reason is that people were not aking the hits from the padded ones. remove the padding, and you get a pleasant "thwack" sound...just like clacker maces.

-+G

Many real polearms aren't very heavy. Axes are, but jumped-up spearheads aren't.

The biggest advantage unpaddeds have is being 7 1/2 feet long. I think the speed helps make up for the fact that I can't shatter your shield and then you with two blows. Forget bitching about unpadded poles, I want to get rid of indestructable shields!

------------------
Owen
"Death is but a doorway-
Here, let me hold that for you"

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by hjalmr:
<B>A stick of rattan isn't even close to the wieght of a glaive or halberd.

(^_^)</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Or a greatsword.

Actually my real great sword is lighter than the rattan one i have by about 2 pounds.

The excuse from some people was that they could not feel padded poles. I just don't believe that, now it doesn't go clack but you should know when you've been hit with a 7 ft stick.

Only problem, other than looking stupid, with unpadded poles is that you can't tell a haft shot from a blade shot.

To me unpadded poled would be like un padded mass weapons. OK i'll just put tape on the end of my stick and now it's a mace. Same diff. I just wish we could make great swords over 6 ft.

Actually, the rationale I heard from a lot of folks was that the longer padded polearms hit <u>too hard</u>; the extra mass in the head made the weapon "thumpier". I'd agree that I could get a "less-ignoreable" blow with my old padded 7' polearm than I can with one of the new unpadded ones; I could also better intimidate an opposing shieldwall into keeping their heads down. But the new ones can be better called on a marginal-force blow, and they're a little easier to control. A steak knife vs. a cleaver.

- Kyle

Actually, the rationale I heard from a lot of folks was that the longer padded polearms hit <u>too hard</u>; the extra mass in the head made the weapon "thumpier". I'd agree that I could get a "less-ignoreable" blow with my old padded 7' polearm than I can with one of the new unpadded ones; I could also better intimidate an opposing shieldwall into keeping their heads down. But the new ones can be better called on a marginal-force blow, and they're a little easier to control. A steak knife vs. a cleaver.

- Kyle

as far as unpadded hitting too hard I would much rather get hit with the padded one than the unpadded

Elbows, points of the shoulder, accidental clips on the shin would all hurt way too much on an unpadded pole.

I do wish that we could put clackers on a pole so people would acknowledge a shot to a leg

I've given this issue a lot of thought.

It is my opinion that once all the reasoning is in the unpadded polearms were motivated by three things:

1) Those that want more speed so they can win more engagements - "their shields are too protective" or "the padded ones move too slow."
2) Those who won't control their blow force with a weapon whose mass is more displaced towards the end - "those padded weapons with the extra weight at the end hit too hard."
3) Those who aren't paying enough attention to the fight and don't know they've been hit with a 6' or 7-1/2' wooden weapon - "I can't get anyone to acknowledge good blows with the padded ones."

It seems we're trying (and I think in the wrong way) to treat the symptoms rather than the diseases.

------------------
Bob Charron
St. Martins Academy of Medieval Arms

This is not aimed at Bob just useing his nice breakdown..

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
1) Those that want more speed so they can win more engagements - "their shields are too protective" or "the padded ones move too slow."
2) Those who won't control their blow force with a weapon whose mass is more displaced towards the end - "those padded weapons with the extra weight at the end hit too hard."
3) Those who aren't paying enough attention to the fight and don't know they've been hit with a 6' or 7-1/2' wooden weapon - "I can't get anyone to acknowledge good blows with the padded ones."
</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

First let me point out the these are 2 diffrent and seperate changes. One is a change from a 6' max to a 7.5' max length. The other is a change from padded to unpadded strikeing surface.

You have to look at it this way because the seperate changes were made for diffrent reasons.

The change in lengeth was made (mostly) to be competive against other kingdoms in inter kingdomw wars. 6 feet is nice for single combat and even small melee, but just doesn't have the reach for effective use in a stagnent shield war on a bridge, against 9 (and now 12) foot spears behind a shield man.

A lot of discussion went into weather the added leverage would be a problem. It was decided it shouldn't be.

Going from padded to unpadded, was a diffrent issue. The nice padded striking surfaces, had a lot of mass but not a lot of smack. Like being hit with a good heavy pillow, people we're not noticing the hit for what it was, so the PA guy would up the power and throw again.

The problem was a lot of the strikes we vertical (down) and the mass was or could cause injuries.

So removing the pad now gave the attack a good soild smack that a fighter in a melee would know was a good weapon hit even if he didn't see it.

So both changes were for melee reasons.

Now there is some experimenting going on with rattan strikng edges (like clicker polls) were the rattan can be shaped into a nice profile for looks and still retain the less maas more smack or the unpadded polls.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
It seems we're trying (and I think in the wrong way) to treat the symptoms rather than the diseases.
</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sometimes you can only treat the symptoms while you're trying to find a cure.

Torvald

Isn't a glaive a polearm with a cleaver type end?

<<< Isn't a glaive a polearm with a cleaver type end? >>>

Not anymore -now it's a quarterstaff!

(^_^)

Torvald,

I understand your sentiment.

Here the disease is a lack of training and accountability. Rather, all the changes are made to compensate for those who are less aware, less trained, or less considerate so that the aware, trained, considerate individuals are preserved from horrible injury be the former.

I believe that participation in armored combat should be a privilege which is earned through proof of the aforementioned three virtues before being allowed to participate, and should these at any time wane, the privilege should be removed. We should demand more training, more awareness, and more considerate behavior all the time, with the consequence of falling short being the loss of the privilege to fight.

We turn our attitude toward considering the first breach as an understandable lapse of attention into allowing two or three breaches, and then allowing all of them.

If someone using excessive force, hitting below the knee, or not acknowledging a blow swung through an arc at them were simply told they were through fighting for the day at the first occurrence, soon people would accept that they had to follow the rules or they wouldn't be able to continue fighting.

Their entrance in the next tournament would be subject to review of the recorded incident.

I'll be the first to volunteer to be judged this way. I *want* to be judged this way.

This would treat the disease.

------------------
Bob Charron
St. Martins Academy of Medieval Arms

Hi Bob (again)

I agree with you.

.. wakes Bob up..

And for "Tourny" fighting that is how it should be (it should be that way all the time but..)

First, the rush to get people authorized (not trained) for Pennsic has become something of a standard for the Middle and the East with both sides trying to dominate the war points. Yes this one event seems to have taken over as the main reason to do fighting. For good or bad that's how it is.

I like to think I'm a reasonably good fighter (new to middle level) and that I play above reproach. bringing us to

The Second reason. Melee, it's an entirly diffrent fight from Tourny. Where I would have no problem taking a hit from a proper padded pole in single combat, that would be because I knew if I was hit what caused it and I saw what caused it. In a line of 50 guys with a few hundred behind all pushing this way and that poles swinging over and around you elbows flying shield pushing. It gets very hard to tell the diffrence from a good padded pole hit from a guy two people to the left and one row back that you didn't even know was there and the elbow of the guy next to you throwing a goofy over head shot at the guy in front of you. No solid thwack, so you keep going, the polearm is pissed nobody is taking hits and cranks up so they will and somebody ends up with a neck injury real fast.

Having two standards would be nice, but that would raise the cost of playing and some of the players can't afford to play as it is. So we have to have a single standard. Now nothing says you can't use a nice looking weapon, and in a Tourny I think that would be a great place for it.

As with everything it sooner or later ends up at the lowest common level.

Torvald

Torvald,

I understand that there is a lot of sentiment for melee being a different fight from tourney, but I disagree with that sentiment.

If something hits me in the head hard enough that I know I was hit in the head (which ain't that much , I fall down. If the fellow beside me hit me, that's fine. If the polearm across the line hit me, that's fine. If my buddy's gauntlet hit me, that's fine too. I'm still out.

I don't see it as being hard to tell when I've been hit. To me it doesn't matter *what* hit me. That's nitpicking and leads to the problem with blow acknowledgement. At any given *grand tournament*, some folks call them "wars", there's plenty of fighting, and I'm well adjusted enoough not to get upset by being put out of a battle by a mistake on my part as to what hit me in the head.

There's plenty of reason to get upset with me if I stay in a battle because I am rationalizing what hit me.

To me it seems simple

------------------
Bob Charron
St. Martins Academy of Medieval Arms

Hi Torvald,

You know, if you can't afford to play a game, then you can't afford to play it. I can't afford to ski anymore, so I don't.

As a question not intended to raise your ire, just putting it out there - Why does everything in the SCA have to be tailored to the lowest common denominator? A line has to be drawn somewhere - you don't let a bum off the street reeking of ripple stagger onto a practice field and start hitting someone with a branch - do you? By not doing so, aren't you discriminating against this poor fellow? Or are you setting a resonable level of basic saftey and competance (and equipment) to play the game.

------------------
Bob R.

I have been using a 6' padded polearm on and off for my entire fighting career. I have never had anyone slough a blow in tourney or melee. I prefer padded poleweapons particularly because you can sort of make them look vaguely like a glaive, halberd, partisan, bardiche etc.
On the other hand, the unpadded 7.5' poles are more dangerous. Granted I came back into fighting a few years after the unpaded poles were allowed, but previously I had never worn forearm protection. Now it is crucial, because if anything is going to break your arm it is going to be the unpadded pole that you don't really see. How many times have any of you thought a polearm to be a spear, and then wham!
As far as what they look like, unpadded poleweapons kind of resemble and are as quick as a naginata. That is if you squint, but then you might think it is a spear and wham!

BEDLAM

For the most part I agree with Murdock (yes thats right I agree with Murdock ) and Bob.

Reasons I've heard (and my opinions on them)
1) can't feel a padded polearm in melee (then the receiving person needs to retrain his calabration level)

2)I can't control, or am not as accurate with, a padded polearm as well as I can an unpadded one (then you need to go train with the polearm until you can control it. )Oh and by the way...lots of polearms were hard to control...thats why they practiced with them in period.(here is a jar of common sense, take it, its free. and please apply it as needed.)

I've fought against both in my limited experience, and I'd much rather be hit with a padded one than an unpadded...and some reasons why...
1) vs. padded I hear THUMP (padded)I say OW! GOOD!
I hear TANG (wood) I say OW! Haft!

2) CORRECTLY done polearms can, with a little effort, look like or at least similar to the polearm they are supposed to represent. an unpadded polearm however, just looks like a stick.

3) On a personal note most of the people i've fought using unpadded Polearms seem to hit even harder than the ones using padded polearms, and oh BTW tend to exibit LESS control over their their polearms than those using padded.

Bob- I believe your dead on right.

Murdock- I just wish we could make great swords over 6 ft.
well you can't here at home, but apparently you can elsewhere...just make it no longer than 7.5 ft long...make the blade as long as you want...and the handle the size you want, and even a butt spike if you like...just remember no quillions...when asked what it is...just say "oh an unpadded glaive."

Ulrich
nice counter leg. but, you called that shot a hip...your dead... you see my stick is a mace...your stick is a sword. (bah just the thought of that makes me feel dirty.)

Torvald said:
It gets very hard to tell the diffrence from a good padded pole hit from a guy two people to the left and one row back that you didn't even know was there and the elbow of the guy next to you throwing a goofy over head shot at the guy in front of you. No solid thwack, so you keep going, the polearm is pissed nobody is taking hits and cranks up so they will and somebody ends up with a neck injury real fast.

My advise, take the shot and fall down...if it was your buddy that elbowed you...he'll probobly say "dude I elbowed you in the head sorry about that" and if not, so what you go down, you fight the next battle, no-ones force level is upped, no one is upset, and were all buddies again in the next fight.

As a rule of thumb I was taught, if your hit, but you have to think whether or not it was good...then it was good. regardless of what happens your honor is safe. I know it sounds crazy but I've done it in a melee and had people on the other side yell for me to come back...the shot was high/haft or what not...remember for the most part we all like each other...even though we tend to nag a bit here.

Ulrich

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Ulrich:
<B>Torvald said:
</B>

As a rule of thumb I was taught, if your hit, but you have to think whether or not it was good...then it was good. regardless of what happens your honor is safe
Ulrich</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes! That is exactly what (in my opinion) we should all do ALL the time, whether it be in melee or tourny. I remeber durring the woods battle this past pensic I was hit on the shoulder by a pole arm. I stepped back and said "I don't know if that was good or not." the guy next to me said "If you don't think it was good ignore it." then the voice of chivalry chimed in in my head and I decided that if there was even a split second of doubt whether it was good or not- it was good. Off I went to the res point. Looking back at it I'm sure it was a bit on the light side, but I do not regret what I did.

Now as far as unpadded pole arms are concerned...My weapon of choice is the pole arm. At pensic and other wars (aka Grand Melees) I use the pole exclusively. However, I have not ever used the unpaded variety, So I don't know how well they handle. Fighting against them, they don't seem to move any faster or hit any harder or softer, but then again that could just be attributed to the person wielding it. Maybe I'll try one out sometime and see. It looks to me like simply a greatsword with a really long handle, and no quillions. In my opinion so far I say polearms should look like polearms. I've always been fond of the vulcanized rubber heads. Some of them can look very impressive. Ok, I'll stop rambling now.

One of the guys on the TC list has handled quite a few period glaives- he said that without doubt our padded glaives were heavier than the real thing. Unpadded glaives handle in a more period fashion. Sure it would be great to have the right weight and a great, realistic look- this is next to impossible.
-V

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Ulrich:
<B>As a rule of thumb I was taught, if your hit, but you have to think whether or not it was good...then it was good. regardless of what happens your honor is safe. I know it sounds crazy but I've done it in a melee and had people on the other side yell for me to come back...
Ulrich</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've experienced that too, I was taught if you have to think about it, lie down, and the opponent will tell you if he thought it was bad. Then again, I've done my fair share of elbow-to-the-head kills too

------------------
Love us with money, or we'll hate you with hammers! - Milk and Cheese

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by hjalmr:
<B>unfortunatly, I was forced to go down to a 1/4 padded polearm because it is next to impossible to beat shieldmen without face thrusting.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Based on this statement, you appear to have choosen to employ a polearm style which relies upon attacks from extreme range. There are many people who utilize this style, typically by running backward in an attempt to maintain the range that they need to successfully throw their polearm shots.

While this can be a successful style, I would suggest that you should also learn the "inside" game at belly-to-belly range. At first you might think that this is a quick method of suicide, but with practice, you can learn these techniques to defeat sword and shield with relative ease at any range.

A few years ago, I gave a class on these techniques at Northshield's Fighters School event, my handouts for that class can be found here.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
Now that we have face thrusting in the Middle Kingdom, everyone uses 1/4 padded polearms. If your only going to require 1/4 padding you might as well just go to unpadded -which they did last month.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"everyone" certainly doesn't use 1/4 padded polearms - In the local group several are using polearms padded for 1/3 to 1/2 of their length.

-Keith/Austin.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Rainald:
<B>How about something besides "I (fill in blank here)the SCA" for a change?

Like the subject says. I finally rotate out of Japan (5 years to long)back to the real world in the near future and would like to know is up with them. I have never even seen one.

I fight with a padded glaive with thrusty on a weekly basis and love going against all weapon combinations with it. However a recent post by someone regarding unpadded glaives caught me attention. The author said something like a padded glaive doesn't stand a chance against unpadded because of the speed difference. So what did they do?, allow people to put a piece of tape on a stick and call it a glaive? Wouldn't you really be using a quarterstaff then?

Opinions/comments?


[This message has been edited by Rainald (edited 01-09-2002).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I prefer unpadded glaives cause they look better when done properly.

please check out the write up I did and some associated pics. img 424 and 422 are the best shots of what mine look like (sans duct tape).

http://www.msnusers.com/banzaimf/files.msnw

Fritz the peasant

Chadwick:

<<< Based on this statement, you appear to have choosen to employ a polearm style which relies upon attacks from extreme range. There are many people who utilize this style, typically by running backward in an attempt to maintain the range that they need to successfully throw their polearm shots. While this can be a successful style, I would suggest that you should also learn the "inside" game at belly-to-belly range. >>>

You have me figured out. Luckily I can hold my own when “inside’, but why risk it. If I can stay safely away, I have the advantage and control the game.

I had to learn the inside game, because no one at practice could catch me and felt it was unfair to take such an advantage without giving them the opportunity to engage me. So I engaged my practice opponents at close range and only worked on the inside chops and slashes. Once I could defeat them at either range, they asked me to show them how to get by my defense and win. Unlike most people, I did. Why? Because the better my opponents are, the better I get.

I do appreciate your suggestion though, because most polearm fighters can’t fight inside.

(^_^)

banzaimf;

I can't get to the write up or pictures and I was really curious to see your polearm.

(^_^)

This is an intersting debate. Let me say first, I'm not a fan of unpadded polearms in general, but I am a fan of unpadded glaives. A glaive is indeed a sword on stick, very much like a naginata.

Having bought my knight a glaive for his knighting ceremony, I of course took it out to my pell to see how it handled. I felt (my opinion only no empirical evidence to back it up) that it was weighted and handled similarly to my unpadded glaive.

Additionally, I often find myself thinking that the unpadded glaive is really just a manner of being able to use my 7.5 ft spear like I would really like to. We all know (and hate) the inevitable "being-rushed-by-the-overzealous-shieldman" and being pounded into the ground. I think with a real spear, the equation would be different. I could trip, bind, break (right Bob?) and hack an onrushing opponent. With the unpadded glaive/spear, I can at least hack.

As for polearms in general, I LOVE the look of the rubber axe heads. I feel they can be excellent solutions to the problem of "looks like a polearm, hits like a polearm-gack!!!" problem.

Regarding greatswords, come to Ansteorra. Only length restriction is 7 ft, and if its ridiculous in any dimension you must have some kind of historical reason.

Finally, regarding quarter staffs, well yes, it is kinda like a quarter staff. After just browsing Jue de la hache, using the butt end (dague? or is it the queue?) is a significant part of the arsenal of the polearm, as it is for quarter staff.