calibration

Auto · Post by **Auto** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 9:29 am

If true authenticity is your goal, then to make the game more real, and therefore gain greater understanding of the "real" medieval tourny, Will all participants put their suits of armour, and cars on the line in each match?? Then we can have our fighters with their heads on an anvil while the smith shapes it to get it off of their head. My issue is not with safty I have done sports that hit way harder, with no protctive geara all, I have suffered broken noses, ribs, and stitches, and many many distended joints doing it, and have continued to get back in, and I think that was plenty safe enough for me, and yes we could jack the SCA up a lot of notches before the injury rate becomes that extreme. The thing is the medieval knight started training at 7, how many scadians did the same, they also HAD training, which the majority of the SCA has no idea how to even begin to really train. To say that going out on the weekends and hitting a bunch of accountants with a stick is to gain an accurate understanding of the medieval knight and tourny is at best self serving, and at worst downright delusional! Personally I would like to see kicks and punhes thrown in as well, but I know that it is gonna make the game any better for anyone but me, so I dont sweat it. I dont say, if you cant take a kick or basket in the face then go play elsewhere. If I want to kick, I go play with those sports that allow kicking, if I want to hit a ball with a stick, I go play those sports that allow you to do so. If you are using the argument of authenticity then please show up in hammer forged iron armour, put your armour and car on the line, and actually do more to train than swing at a pell ten minutes a week.

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:18 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by markH:
SyrRhys,
I think mentioning that you belong to a tournament company helped clear things up a little bit for me. I was coming from the assumption that we were discussing the SCA as it was currently played, with the one shot killed and acted out wounds.[b]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am one of the founders of a tournament company, but I still think what I'm talking about can and should apply to regular SCA fighting as it now stands. Actually, all of my initial comments about calibration were based not on TC tournaments but on the SCA standard combat that exists right now.

I stated that I did not believe that increased force levels would not raise the realism of the game as it is currently played.

But it will do so; just because the combat rule structure isn't very accurate doesn't mean the way we fight can't be made more authentic within that structure.

It sounds to me, that if you are representing a tourney where three blows are considered fight stopping through armour, that would neccesitate a huge increase in power from even the hardest hitting areas.

No more so than we should be doing in regular SCA tournaments.

Are you guys trying to recreate a specific style of tourney, or do you work through a few different formats? do you make a distinction between behourd and war weapons?

Well, the two main people in our group who tend to push ideas like that are very different in their approaches. I prefer simpler 14th-century passages of arms where the contest is the main thing, while the other main "instigator" in our company prefers much more elaborate later-period deeds of arms with all sorts of play-acting and literary allusions. As a result, our events do tend to have a fairly wide range of styles, although most of them are 14th and 15th century (since that's the time period of our confraternaty).

I have to admit that my own experience reflects what was mentioned before, that a blow thrown with proper technique at a relaxed level is stronger and faster than light whippy blows, or blows that are trying to be muscled through.

Yes, that's true, but the test I was talking about still holds true. A powerful blow has more "signals" for your opponent, no matter how good your mastery of kung fu is. It's easier to make a completely unprepared, quick , light blow *land* than it is to land a very hard, very fast, very powerful blow. As you fight more with upper-end fighters you'll come to see that's true.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

[This message has been edited by SyrRhys (edited 02-16-2002).]

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:21 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by cheval:
[B]Mutt, Kyle, et al,

I don't want to put words in Rhys mouth (he's doesn't need any help from me *grin*), but when I read his "my way or the high way" -styled jingoism, I feel a great deal of kinship and probably a lot of the same frustration with the "inclusive, fun, hobby" argument that is invariably thrown at him.<snip>[b]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

By jingo, you keep saying it that well and I invite you to put even more words in my mouth! Yes, everything you said in your very reasoned post is exactly right.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

Richard Blackmoore · Post by **Richard Blackmoore** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:29 am

Quote: "If true authenticity is your goal, then to make the game more real, and therefore gain greater understanding of the "real" medieval tourny, Will all participants put their suits of armour, and cars on the line in each match??"

Only if people start wearing better armour. Otherwise I might end up in plastic! And why would a medieval knight want a car? That is silly!

Quote: "Then we can have our fighters with their heads on an anvil while the smith shapes it to get it off of their head."

OK, now you are exageratting a bit. Even in period that happened rarely

Quote: "My issue is not with safty I have done sports that hit way harder, with no protctive geara all, I have suffered broken noses, ribs, and stitches, and many many distended joints doing it, and have continued to get back in, and I think that was plenty safe enough for me, and yes we could jack the SCA up a lot of notches before the injury rate becomes that extreme."

If everyone wore proper armour, you would be right. But I don't agree that we need to jack the force levels up a few notches. I think it should simply be the same average higher level of force predominant in Atlantia, the East and select other areas already. I am not saying I agree we need an extremely high level of force at all, I simply think the low side of calibration that I run into, especially in areas where people don't wear armour (T-shirts/Kidney belt/light plastic crap), is too low and allows for unrealistic fighting and whining. I agree with William McCrimmon that we don't need to be destroying people in armour or knocking their heads off. I do agree with Rhys that too many people hit to light to deliver what I would consider a telling blow in the SCA armour standard we use to define what calibration should be against. I think a happy compromise should be reached.

As far as being inclusive, we are too inclusive. We have fencing for people that want to hit light and take very light. Why change the armoured combat into something else that already exists.

As far as someone elses point that in a tourney company, you hit harder because we are supposed to be fighting armoured opponents, that is the exact problem mentality we run into in standard SCA combat; SCA combat is defined as and is supposed to be armoured combat, NOT FENCING. Anyone that thinks otherwise is not reading the rules correctly.

Quote: "The thing is the medieval knight started training at 7, how many scadians did the same, they also HAD training, which the majority of the SCA has no idea how to even begin to really train."

The majority of the SCA is stupid and does not bother to properly prepare themselves mentally or physically, much less bother to train even when experts are available and willing to help. If you look at any other adult amateur sport (hockey, soccer, football, tag football, rugby, boxing, martial arts, wrestling, even wimpy sports like basketball) they expect people to show up with a certain level of physical conditioning and that they will practice. If they don't take care of themselves and train, they are either prevented from playing (many require physicals), to not complain when they are not terribly successful and to not whine if they suck or get hurt due to a lack of preparedness. And they do not expect someone who is unable to compete properly to ask that the game be diliuted or the rules changed to permit them to play.

Quote: "To say that going out on the weekends and hitting a bunch of accountants with a stick is to gain an accurate understanding of the medieval knight and tourny is at best self serving, and at worst downright delusional!:

I don't go out to hit accountants, I go out to engage in honorable combat with noble men in the pursuit of excellence! And also to have fun. It is fun to strive to be better and to improve one's ability to perform.

Quote: "Personally I would like to see kicks and punhes thrown in as well, but I know that it is gonna make the game any better for anyone but me, so I dont sweat it."

It would absolutely make me more successful, I don't know that I like the idea. But that is personal preference to a degree. There certainly appear to be some period tournaments where this was permitted, at least early tournaments where the rules could be minimal.

Quote: "I dont say, if you cant take a kick or basket in the face then go play elsewhere."

If the rules change to allow kicking and a basket to the face, I probably would not like it. But if those are the rules and they are based on authentic tournaments, I would suggest to people that they work to achieve a consensus to change the rules in such a way that a majority of authenticity minded noble men would agree that this is best for our recreation of the sport. I don't really care what the masses think, this is an elitist sport, it was never meant to be anything else. Knightly tournaments were not a forum for the rabble to take part in. Even in period.

Quote: "If I want to kick, I go play with those sports that allow kicking, if I want to hit a ball with a stick, I go play those sports that allow you to do so."

So, if the game already allowed those things, you would not have a problem with it. But if the game does not, you do not want someone to argue in favor of it and advocate possible change? I don't understand that. I am often at odds with Rhys, Cheval and others, yet I value their opinions and ideas. Just because I may like parts of the game/sport/reenactment in the SCA the way they are, does not mean that we should not constantly reevaluate the way things are done and seek to improve it. For example, I don't really want to see kicking, punching, dangerous throws or wrestling on the ground added to SCA combat. Yet, I do want to hear other people's opinions on these. I was originally apalled by face thrusting. I still am not thrilled about it, but I have learned to adapt my thinking so that it does not ruin the game for me and to acknowledge that it was a period practice in some tournaments. It certainly has make forms other than sword and shield more effective in the lists and melee.

Quote: "If you are using the argument of authenticity then please show up in hammer forged iron armour, put your armour and car on the line, and actually do more to train than swing at a pell ten minutes a week."

Um. Are you trying to be funny or obnoxious?
Rhys actually has some hand forged armour. I am not sure if it is iron, some of it might be spring steel. And Rhys is talking about making combat more authentic, although I am sure he would agree the average SCA members armour is pathetic (plastic/not a medieval pattern/mismatched pieces/T-shirts/etc). Are you saying that if someone does not have perfect medieval armour, he should be able to fight in an inauthentic manner? That is rather foolish. As far as practice on a pell, he is a Count in the SCA as well as a knight and at least in his younger days practiced quite frequently. Once again, your car argument is truly out of place. Now you are saying that if we want to improve the accuracy of our recreation of combat, we must also ransom our modern possessions? Please tell me you are not a liberal NYC lawyer or a friend of Ron Kuby's, although that would explain a lot. If however, you required participants to bring a horse, he might be willing to accomodate you; providing you showed up with a worthy steed and not a flea bitten nag

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:44 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Auto:
If true authenticity is your goal, then to make the game more real, and therefore gain greater understanding of the "real" medieval tourny, Will all participants put their suits of armour, and cars on the line in each match?? Then we can have our fighters with their heads on an anvil while the smith shapes it to get it off of their head. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, we won't do those things. Why must you take what I say and push it past it's reasonable limits? I don't want people hurt, I don't want people losing their cars (not that that was done in the later-period tournaments that are my focus anyway; you need to do more research)... this isn't a way of life! Just saying we can get closer to the real thing doesn't mean we have to go to those kinds of extremes!

You sound like the kind of guy who says "well, we're not really fighting with steel weapons, so what we do can't be made *perfectly* realistic, so I'm justified in doing *anything* I want". Kind of like the guy who says: "well, since the steel in my armor isn't exactly the same as the steel in real armor, so there's no reason to try to get the armor to be authentic in design". Poppycock.

The thing is the medieval knight started training at 7, how many scadians did the same, they also HAD training, which the majority of the SCA has no idea how to even begin to really train. To say that going out on the weekends and hitting a bunch of accountants with a stick is to gain an accurate understanding of the medieval knight and tourny is at best self serving, and at worst downright delusional!

LOL! Your post suggests that you have gotten most of your ideas about medieval knighthood from Gies _Life in a Medieval Castle_. *Some* knights began training for knighthood at 7, true... as pages in a lord's home, not in the arts of war. Moreover, most knights weren't paragons of military skill; they were landholders and funtionaries, who might fight in a tournament once or twice in their lives, and might have only been in one battle or none in their entire lives. Of course, there were many who fought constantly, but you know what? I'll bet the average SCA knight has more helmet time than most medieval knights, even fairly active ones (don't scream... our way isn't as valuable since it's not for real!) since our game is so much safer than theirs was. As for SCAdians getting training, how are you qualified to comment? Are you a royal peer? Are you even a knight? No? Funny, I could tell you weren't. I got a lot of training, as did all those in my household and lots of other households I know.

You need to do more reading of more modern and scholarly texts. As a bare-bones beginning, I would recommend Barber and Barker's _Tournament_ and Peter Coss' _The Knight in Medieval England_; both are excellent works, and both will really shake up the kinds of things you believe.

Personally I would like to see kicks and punhes thrown in as well, but I know that it is gonna make the game any better for anyone but me, so I dont sweat it. I dont say, if you cant take a kick or basket in the face then go play elsewhere.

First, please show me evidence for kicking and punching in armored tournament combat. When you can't find it, go back and read the books I recommended above. Then come back and have this conversation. If you want to kick and punch, go play with the Tuchux, but such attacks have no effect on armored warriors, so why do them? That's just silly.

If you are using the argument of authenticity then please show up in hammer forged iron armour, put your armour and car on the line, and actually do more to train than swing at a pell ten minutes a week.

First, much (and more all the time) of my armor is hardened spring steel and cloth, which is very close to exactly what 14th century armor was like (not iron! LOL!); read Blair's _European Armor_.

Second, knights fromt he period in which I fight didn't put up their horses and armor in tournament. Read Barber and Barker.

Third, how much I train isn't your concern. Your concern should be whether you can beat me, and if I'm truly as inexpert as you imply, I think you should have no trouble beating me, from all the macho stuff you wrote. I await you on the field (and you may punch and kick to your heart's delight!) Besides, what does the amount of training have to do with doing things *accurately*?

Son, you have a lot of very inaccurate and misguided beliefs about the middle ages and about knightly tournament combat. I'd recommend some more reading before you criticize someone else. I don't mind scholarly debate, but I don't want to get into a dispute with someone who hasn't done enough reading for the level of belligerance he shows. It's probably not your fault; the things you believe are very widely-held beliefs, but don't challenge someone on them until you've actually read them in a real work of scholarship.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

Auto · Post by **Auto** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:28 am

Before I get any further into this thread, let me state emphatically that 1) I love to hit hard and be hit hard, I dont whine when I get pounded, I have a ronald helm 1/8" plate that I dared (in a most friendly way) A particular master at arms to dent, and he did, I still have it to prove it. I wear near minimal armour standards, and have yet to whine about getting hit, nor has my calibration been questioned, nor have I needed to whine about others calibration in taking my shots. 2) I am into the SCA because I love the middle ages! If I just wanted to swing rattan, I would go fight with the dog brothers. 3) I think there are MANY changes that should be made to the SCA heavy list rules, that will enhance it both as a medieval recreation, and as a sport.
With that said:
Reference to the car was an attempt to recreate the importance of the loss of armour and steed to the medieval knight, and to give a frame of reference to how serious the knight took the tourny. Many knights were paupers. The car was the closest possesion to rival that loss, that immediatly came to mind. (as to flea bitten nags , check out some cars *jk*).
My statement on rules in other sports is simply to state that the thing that separates one sport from another is simply rules, and while I whole heartedly believe and advocate the evolution of rule changes, they need to be considered in relation to the sport as a whole, and not to one person, group or body types personal desires. My point on this topic was not to actually address rule changes anyway, and if I spoke to much on that subject it was because of unintended digression. As to weather if the SCA already allowed those things (Kicks punches), would I have a problem. I would only in the sense that I think it would take away from the enjoyability of the sport overall. My real issue is with the belief that we have to start calling shots at some insanely higher level, and that alone will make the sport more "authentic". I think the current level of cal. in the east is just fine and I am comfortable with my lady 5'3 120 not fat

participating, but over the years I have seen fighter whos calibration wouldn't give me that same comfort level. I dont want to see THAT become the norm. I am not all inclusive and have the same disdain for fencers as rhys has shown in other threads (sorry fencers but..) nor do I like to see ANY fighters (or "atheletes" for that matter) show up grossly out of shape and ill prepared, and I think they should have the sense to stay in the audience or at least not cry when they get hit or pull a muscle.
As to inauthentic armour, my 2Cents is right up with the "no uncovered plastic platform" (please no comments on my first attempt in 90 at black plastic maximillian plate

), but I also believe we should make allowances for new young fighters that are just getting into it and may not have the resources or commitment to do more, YET. I find it sad when I see any obviously experienced fighter in any visible plastic.
Addressing the accountant comment. My point was to illustrate that NONE of us are real career knights and as such dont have the level of commitment to prepare, as a real career knight did.
As to weather I was being funny or obnoxious? Both? obnoxiously funny? I meant no insult at anyone in particular, and certainly was not saying that rhys or any other SCA knight or any one else for that matter did those things, but at the same time as you yourself stated the preparation of the majority of the SCA's fighting population is woefully lacking, and I will do EVERYTHING in my power to change that as we progress. I just wanted to point out that NONE (not a single SCAdian) is actually remotely close to being authentic and we (all of us) should not try to hide behind authenticity as an excuse to try to get our way.
While I may quote individual's statements as launch pads for refutation, I in no way intend to disrespect or insult that individual. I think every fighter that gets in there and take their beating like a man (or woman) deserves much acolades even if they never win a single match.

And lastly, ROFL No, I am far from being a NYC liberal lawyer(tho I do live in NYC), and I have NO idea who ron kuby is.
Hmmm. THis little box makes it hard to preview this post and since it is a small novella, I hope it doesn't ramble too much, and actually makes my point without being misstated

Looking for the magick of the middle ages, not the politics.
Auto

Khann · Post by **Khann** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:52 am

SyrRhys please explain.
First, please show me evidence for kicking and punching in armored tournament combat. When you can't find it, go back and read the books I recommended above. Then come back and have this conversation. If you want to kick and punch, go play with the Tuchux, but such attacks have no effect on armored warriors, so why do them? That's just silly. Quote:

I have hit people with a basket hilt on accident a couple of times. I usually got an AWShit what the hell are you doing. (This usually dented armour or bruised flesh. I think that the shot would be effective. In history many Knights would use the hilts for smashes and such.

Thanks Khann

Auto · Post by **Auto** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 12:10 pm

Sir Rhys

I in no way meant you personally were inept. I used your statements to launch my positions, but the statement on unathletic and untrained fighters was not directed at you, but at the multitude of people that fit into this category, nor did I intend to come across as macho, just to illustrate that I am not taking my position on the fear of pain or injury as was implied in some of the earlier posts on this and related topics.
Ransoming of arms armour and property were very common in the period I portray, which is well within the corpra guidelines. I am well aware that pages were not allowed to handle arms and armour until squiring at 14, and while I will defer to you much deeper knowledge of medieval history, There are a lot of years and miles covered by the allowable periods set forth in corpra, and many things were customary at one accepted time and place.
Again I state to you Sir rhys, that I meant no insult or disrespect to either you personally or your position.
Auto

MarkH · Post by **MarkH** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 12:23 pm

When I said that the blows in SyrRhys tournament company needed to be very hard what I meant was: If I read correctly, they are fighting to three landed blows that would be considered incapacitating to a man in armour. This would require that they damage the man inside the armour, and as SyrRhys pointed out, that takes a huge amount of force.
The SCA norm as I have always understood it, is landing a telling blow to the man in armour. Damaging him is not an issue, and would not neccasarily require as much force.
SyrRhys, Have you ever gotten a chance to fight with accurate steel blunts? (not the crowbars that most steel groups had been using up to a few years ago). I have actually found that rattan does greater damage to my plate armour than my blunt Del Tins do, at similar force levels.

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 12:25 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Khann:
SyrRhys please explain.
First, please show me evidence for kicking and punching in armored tournament combat. When you can't find it, go back and read the books I recommended above. Then come back and have this conversation. If you want to kick and punch, go play with the Tuchux, but such attacks have no effect on armored warriors, so why do them? That's just silly. Quote:

I have hit people with a basket hilt on accident a couple of times. I usually got an AWShit what the hell are you doing. (This usually dented armour or bruised flesh. I think that the shot would be effective. In history many Knights would use the hilts for smashes and such.

Thanks Khann<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, in period it was common to strike with the hilt, but that's not the same thing as punching and kicking. As for your comment about hitting with the basket hilt, well, medieval swords didn't have them (remember, the basket-hilted broadsword is out of period, and certainly wasn't used in tournament)!

Look, none of the primary source material supports punches or kicks in tournament combat. Of course, just because we don't see it in the iconography or read about it in chronicles that's not good enough since we know that the absence of evidence isn't the same as evidence of absence. But look at it logically: What effect do you get from kicking or punching an armored man? None! I'll grant you that if you're fighting without visors you might use gadlings on an opponent's face (and we do have some evidence for that), but that's not the same thing as punching like our martial arts hero wannabe was talking about above! No, sorry, guys who believe in that have simply seen way too many bad martial arts movies. You guys go ahead and kick, I'll just stick with using my sword on you.

Mostly this is the kind of argument I get from wannabes who don't fight all that well and just want to find ways to knock our fighting system to make themselves sound like the great warrior they they think they really are underneath.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 12:28 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Auto:
Before I get any further into this thread, <snip>
Auto<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm sorry, I just don't get your point.

One thing, however: you said something about "insaneley higher levels of calibration". Who on here suggested that? Show me where I, or anyone else, said that's what was being suggested.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 12:39 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by markH:
When I said that the blows in SyrRhys tournament company needed to be very hard what I meant was: If I read correctly, they are fighting to three landed blows that would be considered incapacitating to a man in armour. This would require that they damage the man inside the armour, and as SyrRhys pointed out, that takes a huge amount of force.
The SCA norm as I have always understood it, is landing a telling blow to the man in armour. Damaging him is not an issue, and would not neccasarily require as much force.
SyrRhys, Have you ever gotten a chance to fight with accurate steel blunts? (not the crowbars that most steel groups had been using up to a few years ago). I have actually found that rattan does greater damage to my plate armour than my blunt Del Tins do, at similar force levels.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The SCA standard is the same as the TC standard, it's just they act it out incorrectly with one blow kills. They're still supposed to be fighting in armor, and that means hitting hard enough to damage someone in armor if you had a real sword (NOTE: I'm *not* suggesting we should really hurt someone in real armor! We're using rattan! It doesn't do the smae damage to people!). A "telling blow" means hard enough to cause damage through armor!

No, I haven't fought with good steel replicas. The problem is that they do serious damage to the people inside the armor when you hit at realistic force levels. When I've seen the folks who "fight" with steel, they have so many rules about targeting and they swing such light blows that there's no safe way to make a comparison.

In a way, rattan gives us a *better* way to learn about real tournament combat, because it allows us to fight at full speed and full power without actually hurting one another, and there's no way to learn about fighting *at all* unless you do it full speed and full power.

And you're right about the bad replicas, by the way: They're too heavy, too clumsy and nothing at all like a real sword. I have a friend who made a long sword that I found to be *way* too heavy, but he laughed at me and said it was exactly the same weight as a real sword. I have had the opportunity to handle both a real longsword and a *superb* replica, and he's right in a way: His sword is more correct in terms of actual weight, but my lighter sword is more correct in terms of the way it *functions* because of the fact that the superb balance and design of the real sword make it fast and very manueverable.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

muttman · Post by **muttman** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 1:33 pm

Cheval,
the spin you put on this whole issue has definitly got me re-thinking. We are definitly the better for having more level heads such as yours around to temper the arrogance of some and the defensivness of others (like myself)
I appreciate you taking the time to clarify things for me. When put like you did, things really do take a different light in my eyes and I will be looking hard at things from that new light now. As i said earlier, I am usualy resistant to change, but as you have explained things it is more of an evolution than change. I can get behind evolution.
Thanks!
John

Auto · Post by **Auto** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 1:51 pm

John

Thank you for your words in my defence, but your right about my reaction to them, I didn't mention any of those things on purpose, I wanted my statements to defend themselves, not my resume. I also did not wish to start making enemies, and wanted to give people the chance to meet me in person, instead of giving a "resume".

Auto

muttman · Post by **muttman** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 1:55 pm

Auto,
Fine, its handled. It just really chapped my ass is all.

hjalmr · Post by **hjalmr** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 2:22 pm

SyrRhys:

Actually, Punching and kicking DOES have an effect on the fighting field -just watch some Tuchuk fighting! Tuchuks will punch, kick, and even bite if the could. I'm not saying that it's period or whatnot, just that it does have an impact on medieval fighting if used.

(^_^)
PS: And just for the record -I don't think the SCA should punch or kick.

Richard Blackmoore · Post by **Richard Blackmoore** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 4:52 pm

Quote: "...They're still supposed to be fighting in armor, and that means hitting hard enough to damage someone in armor if you had a real sword (NOTE: I'm *not* suggesting we should really hurt someone in real armor! We're using rattan! It doesn't do the smae damage to people!). A "telling blow" means hard enough to cause damage through armor!"

And here is where the problems in understanding start. Rhys is absolutely right that this is what current SCA rules and guidelines call for in terms of calibration. It is why in the East and some areas we have come to expect a stout blow to be delivered cleanly. This was were based on our belief as to what force levels were required to damage, kill or disable a person wearing the SCA target armour, had a real weapon been substituted for our rattan weapons. This was a great idea. It is what I based my calibration on.

In recent years, many people have stated their belief that while they acknowledge the SCA standard, that the force required to seriously injure, disable or kill somebody in the SCA target armour is actually HIGHER than what we typically believed even in Atlantia/East! This means that the SCA rules easily justify or actually may require a standard level of force that is significantly higher than even current average Atlantian/Eastern. Something more along the lines of the so called "High Game" level that has been discussed or used to describe some of the very high force levels Duke Michael of Bedford and others have experimented with. Michael of Bedford once hit me so hard that he rung my bell a bit, then told me not to take the shot, it had not landed properly and could not have had an acceptable level of force. Meanwhile I was hoping no one ever hit me that hard with an unimpeded blow again. At least not without me expecting it. And quite frankly, at that level of force, I would consider a different set of armour. I simply was not expected that level of calibration as it was higher than what I had experienced previously in Atlantia or the East as an accepted standard. It was beyond the force level I think the SCA should be playing at, though certainly the SCA rules and guidelines currently permit it. It was certainly beyond the currently accepted standard in the area I am from. In my area, that level of calibration would generally have been considered unacceptable/excessive. Though I understand that Sir Rhys and others have played at that level and not had problems with it. Had I been prepared for it and expecting it, I would have been able to deal with it. The problem is getting everybody on the same page so we all know what force levels to expect and what to deliver.

While I do think that at times Rhys and others argue that a significantly higher level similar to what Duke Michael was advocating can be safe and should be considered, I don't think that is his point here. I believe this is the force level William MacCrimmon was arguing against and in my opinion, that level of force is not good for the SCA.

For more details on the actual force levels required to cause injury, disablement, death to someone in SCA target armour, refer to postings by Vitus, Duke Conn and others on other threads. Even there, much of what we think on this topic is conjecture as we simply cannot go and actually test this by whacking people in armour with real weapons at force to see what it really takes to injure, disable or kill them.

So while I don't want "insanely high" calibration, I do believe that if you wear armour, the common Eastern/Atlantian force levels would continue to be acceptable to me as a "good" standard to use within the SCA. I think that the force levels Duke Michael and others were experimenting with is too high. Call it insanely high if you want. Name calling does not really help with a serious discussion of this nature, so if anyone is taking this wrong, it is not my intention.

I do not think we need to crank up to such higher levels, though anyone reading the SCA rules and trying to apply those standards would certainly be justified in doing so. This is why many people like myself that want to follow the rules, think that perhaps they should be rewritten to reflect a different standard. It does however concern me that if we rewrite the rules, they may go too far the other way and encourage non-armoured fighting and lousy technique. I want to know you hit me, I don't want to play at boffer, LARP or other lower force levels. If I wanted to do that, there are plenty of good groups who do that already.

The SCA rules were written before modern studies and recreations had been available for us to judge the effects of real swords on people. Rhys and others arguing for counted blows in tournaments, where we all simply agree to land three sturdy blows, and give up on the idea of whether or not a given blow could damage/kill/disable someone certainly have merit and historical precedent. The hard part is determining what level of force that sturdy blow should be landed at. My sturdy blow may be insanely high to an Ansteorran and too light for some Atlantians!

I'll never forget sparring with the likes of Dukes Anton, Richard, Michael of Bedford & Count Kai from Atlantia, Duke Inman Ansteorra, the usual Easterners and many talented fighters from other kingdoms years ago at an invitational Pennsic Gods Of War type practice on the main battlefield. This was the year of the 100 degree weather years ago when they were cancelling battles left and right. Due to the heat I only got to fight a certain number of these excellent combatants personally, including Inman, Richard, Anton, Kai and others. If I remember correctly Duke Ronald and Gregor took part as well. At one point I was fighting Duke Anton (a talented lefthander with good footwork) and hitting him (infrequently) with the same level of force that other people earlier that day, prior to the practice were whining to me about as being way too brutal, then having Duke Anton call the same level of force "pitifully light!". He said it politely and quite frankly, did not expect or want me to take blows that he hit me with at that force level.

So on the same day, I was to some fighters a brute hitting way too hard, to some I was hitting just right and to others I was hitting way too light.

Even within the East Kingdom, calibration varies. Back when Aethelmarc was a principality of the East, I knew that if I went to play in Aethelmarc, the overall calibration there was typically much lower then the rest of the East Kingdom and that with certain well travelled exceptions, they would want me to hit lighter. They would get insulted when I asked them not to take a blow that I was certain I had not delivered with adequate force!

In my area, I have gotten used to fighting with excellent fighters. Some of their calibration is higher, some of it is lower, but most of them fall into what I call typical Atlantian/Eastern Chivalry calibration levels. I don't think the level is ridiculous or dangerous if properly armoured. Some of the people you may know in this category where I think their current typical calibration represents a good range include: Sir Stephan Von Dresdan, Duke Gregor, Duke Timothy of Arundale, Duke Lucan, Duke Ronald. Do I like the "high game" some people talk about, where we could go to much higher force levels? Yes. Do I think it would be good for the SCA? No I do not. Certainly many of us, including myself and Rhys could play at that level and still have fun safely, but I don't think the majority of the SCA can.

We have wide discrepancies in what we say acceptable calibration should be. My point is, we need a mechanism for determining a common "good/telling blow" force range that the bulk of us can live with, without this becoming something less than armoured combat.

Many areas take shots well below typical Eastern/Atlantian calibration. I used to run into this at Pennsic all the time. I would hit somebody with a blow that I knew I had not thrown with enough force. The person would insist on taking it and in many cases tell me it was too hard. And I am certainly not one of the harder hitting people in the East! Now typically, these folk were the ones wearing little or no armour or from a hot weather kingdom. But quite frankly, the calibration of their more talented fighters was higher and they also delivered sturdier blows for the most part. Yet I would agree Eastern/Atlantian calibration was higher. Many talented and skilled fighters from other kingdom do take lighter and hit lighter than the typical force level I have grown accustomed to, yet most of these still deliver something close to a sturdy blow and are capable of hitting harder as they do have excellent technique.

I am probably rambling, I am distracted.

As far as fencing goes, it is something that has merit. I simply consider it to be something different than armoured combat and way too many people appear to want us to wear armour and then fence instead of hitting each other as if we were wearing armour for a reason.

[This message has been edited by Richard Blackmoore (edited 02-16-2002).]

cheval · Post by **cheval** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 5:58 pm

Rhys: "In armored combat what usually happened was that either the person sponsoring the deed of arms recognized that 'enough had been done' ... or you yielded because you'd been battered down. Our fighting, and especially the counted blow fighting that is now taking place, simply recognizes this."

Self-counting is still self-determination, and there is a wide difference between acknowledging a fixed number of your opponent's attack and surrendering because you lack the energy to continue. I agree that medieval practice required either an external judge, or a victory condition (exhaustion) we don't currently employ. Your above argument is a straw man fallacy and fails to successfully associate our practice with medieval reality.

Wanna try again *g*?

-cheval-

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 7:05 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by cheval:
Self-counting is still self-determination, and there is a wide difference between acknowledging a fixed number of your opponent's attack and surrendering because you lack the energy to continue. I agree that medieval practice required either an external judge, or a victory condition (exhaustion) we don't currently employ. Your above argument is a straw man fallacy and fails to successfully associate our practice with medieval reality.

Wanna try again *g*?

-cheval-[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You don't understand. We don't want to *actually* hurt anyone through armor, or to batter them so much that they can't continue. Those things are dangerous. As a result, we attempted to find a way to *simulate* those conditions, and our three-blow system does just that. No, it's not perfect, but it *is* much closer to reality than what the SCA currently uses, and is still convenient to use and track while fighting.

This is especialy true since rattan allows us to use medieval levels of force without causing medieval levels of damage.

The fact is that the SCA idea of one blow taking someone out (not killing them, but forcing them to yield) is pretty silly (but not impossible; it can be done, it just probably didn't happen very often). So our idea was to develop a way to *simulate* the effects of medieval tournament combat without actually hurting anyone.

If you can think of a more realistic way of portraying these effects than what we're using now that is also simple and easy to track during a fight I'm open to hear it, but I doubt one can be found. This one was developed by some pretty experienced and skilled fighters.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 7:11 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Auto:
Ransoming of arms armour and property were very common in the period I portray, which is well within the corpra guidelines. I am well aware that pages were not allowed to handle arms and armour until squiring at 14, and while I will defer to you much deeper knowledge of medieval history, There are a lot of years and miles covered by the allowable periods set forth in corpra, and many things were customary at one accepted time and place.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course there's more than one time and place, and customs changed in both. But you said that if we wanted to be *really* authentic we should have to give up valuable ransoms when we lost. By saying that, you effectively grouped the whole middle ages into one block, where everyone had to pay a big ransom if they lost. You were doing what you just talked about here! By showing you that *my* persona wouldn't have had to do such things, I was attempting to teach you that very fact; that the *whole* middle ages wasn't the way you had painted it.

And don't back down because I've read more, damn it! I'm wrong all the time; if you think I'm wrong then go research your position and prove me so! I hate it when people tell me I'm wrong when they haven't done the research to be qualified to have an opinion, but I hate it just as much when they back down just because they think I've read more so I must be right!

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

cheval · Post by **cheval** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 8:20 pm

Rhys: "You don't understand. We don't want to *actually* hurt anyone through armor, or to batter them so much that they can't continue."

It appears that the misunderstanding is yours. I never implied that you are trying to hurt anyone (could you be confusing our discussion with another?). My point is that self-determination is anything but medieval. Whether it is one blow or three, calling one's own defeat is a-medieval at best. Indeed, you would be much more authentic if you just let the opponents go at it, trading blows until a judge or gallery simply stopped the fight when they had seen enough (wasn't it Finvarr who proposed that the combatants may have actually stood to 'take' their blows in turn, since this is apparently one component of knightly skill?). And while it lacks the romantic ideal self-determination embodies, it is certainly closer to your 'baton' reference and much more medieval in aspect.

My only real question is, since you know that external judging was a common form of adjudication, why do you continue with the conceit of "accrued damage"? Could it be that our modern construct is still more appealing than the historical model, and you will use even this feeble excuse ("3 blows more accuraely reflects authentic damage") to provenence it *grin*??

-cheval-

muttman · Post by **muttman** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 8:58 pm

In light of Richards post, I think I see where some of my confusion may be coming from at least in regards to calibration. As I now understand it, what some people propose is raising the SCA wide bar to the level of calibration of some of the more "rugged" East kingdom fighters. Not the high end fighters, and certainly not more, but to a good stiff East kingdom level. I already fight there and am comfortable with it, so obviously I see no problem with that. I did fight in Meridies a few times when I lived there, and felt that they hit and took way too light.(the first time I fought, I pegged a guy with a decent shot that may or may not have been called up here. He asked me not to hit him so hard, and he was the norm there)
If this is the ballpark we are talking about then that is perfectly fine. If we are talking about raising the bar to the high end game level then I question the wisdom in that. Long ago I had the opprotunity to fight Duke Lucan (then just Master Lucan) at that level frequently. He would sometimes crank it up to there for training purposes. It was a bit more than I want on a day to day basis, but quite intructional and humbleing when I got cocky.
John

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:22 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by cheval:
My point is that self-determination is anything but medieval. Whether it is one blow or three, calling one's own defeat is a-medieval at best. Indeed, you would be much more authentic if you just let the opponents go at it, trading blows until a judge or gallery simply stopped the fight when they had seen enough (wasn't it Finvarr who proposed that the combatants may have actually stood to 'take' their blows in turn, since this is apparently one component of knightly skill?). And while it lacks the romantic ideal self-determination embodies, it is certainly closer to your 'baton' reference and much more medieval in aspect.

My only real question is, since you know that external judging was a common form of adjudication, why do you continue with the conceit of "accrued damage"? Could it be that our modern construct is still more appealing than the historical model, and you will use even this feeble excuse ("3 blows more accuraely reflects authentic damage") to provenence it *grin*??<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think most medieval combat was either ended by the presiding official or was self-determination.

First, the presiding judge seems to have only intervened when a safety issue occurred or when specific acts took place (like falling down, etc.). Our marshalls already fulfill this role. I have *heard* they could also intervene in instances where one fighter was just completely overmatched, but I don't have any evidence for that myself.

As for self determination, if you are forced to yield becasue you've been beaten senseless, because you've been wounded or because you're exhausted, isn't that self determination? What we're saying with the three-blow system is that the three blows represents a cumulative of battering damage that would, with real weapons, have caused you to admit defeat. In one way this is unsatisfactory because it ignores the fact that some individuals are just tougher than others, but that's impossible to portray within any reasonable rule system.

As for not wanting others to judge victory, you're right, but not for the reason you think. It's not that I'm wedded to the modern SCA idea of judging our own blows (although I like the idea of being on my honr), it's that I don't trust modern people to do so in a medieval way. Medeival knights were more knowledgeable about real fighting than most of us are, and I just see a tremendous opportunity in that type of thing for miscalls and modernism in judging. We'll end up like modern fencing where any touch counts. No thank you.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:26 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by muttman:
If we are talking about raising the bar to the high end game level then I question the wisdom in that. Long ago I had the opprotunity to fight Duke Lucan (then just Master Lucan) at that level frequently. He would sometimes crank it up to there for training purposes. It was a bit more than I want on a day to day basis, but quite intructional and humbleing when I got cocky.
John [/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, I *am* talking about this latter level. My preference is to fight at the level that Duke Michael, Duke Anton, Duke Ronald, and Duke Lucan use (hmmm... note that these are all dukes?). None of these gentlemen cause a disproportionate number of injuries.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

muttman · Post by **muttman** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:41 pm

"Actually, I *am* talking about this latter level. My preference is to fight at the level that Duke Michael, Duke Anton, Duke Ronald, and Duke Lucan use (hmmm... note that these are all dukes?). None of these gentlemen cause a disproportionate number of injuries."

You are then talking about the levels these dukes all use in the latter rounds at crown? That is the level I was refering to with Duke Lucan. not the day to day level of fighting these well above the norm fighters use. If that is your meaning then no, I think that is too much. I don`t want to be hit as hard on a regular basis as Lucan sometimes hits in the finals for crown. I think the level the upper level fighters in the East hit on an everyday basis is adequate. Hard enough so that technique is important, but not to the level of potentialy injurious to lighter armored opponants, and I think if the whole SCA started calibrating that high, from superdukes to boodo, some folks would get hurt.
John

Auto · Post by **Auto** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:18 pm

Hiya
Just got back in from teaching class. I have to agree with muttman on that level being just a little too much for my taste, and by that I mean Duke Micheal's, While I enjoy his incredible force, I wouldn't like to see it that hard always, in all tournys. Great for crown and ducal challenges, but too much (in my opinion) for local every day combat. I personally like the current east kingdom calibration. It is good and hard, and the norm where it is keeps the high end where it is. The high end fighters know each other and can crank it up on an individual basis (I point out the dent in my helm

), but if micheals power became the norm where would the high end be? I digress again.
Sir Rhys
I didn't back down

I conceded to both your point that MY argument that "my period did it this way" is in no way more valid than your "my period did it this way" and the belief that, while I consider myself very well read on this subject, you seem to be much more deeply researched than I. I didn't want to continue an argument based on time period tastes. I realize that punches were considered unmanly to medieval knights, and wasn't advocating that, I was trying to make a point that what is gives ME an advantage in SCA combat, is not necesarily the best thing for the society. I would love to see lots of things changed in the SCA combat, and I emphatically agree with you on the three blow system, in fact I have spoken with people saying the same thing before I even discovered this board. I thing the one shot, your dead thing, can definetly be improved. My whole point in this whole thread was to say that 1) if you are regularly getting hit forty times in a five minute match, Dont necesarilly worry about your cal. worry about your defense, because it looks like it needs work. 2) That making micheal of bedfords calibration, while it may help the large heavy fighter in plate win more, will not improve the reality or authenticity of what we do. add 3) None of us (and I saw you say the same thing in response to another post) are truly authentic so the "real knights hit really really hard, so we should to in order to be authentic argument" is not really valid.
Hmmm hope this tme I said it.
Auto

Ulrich · Post by **Ulrich** » Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:23 pm

Ok...I'm going to do my best to make a reply based on an actual understanding of the force level Syr Rhys is refering to.

but to do that I need a tidbit of information.

what I need to know is simply If I'm wearing my SCA assumed harness (which i do have and do fight in) of Conical helm, Rivited Chain over a padded gambison with leather arm and leg protection...metal elbow cops..etc..using my sword and kite shield...what ammount of damage should I sustain to my body through that armor when you strike me with a "standard" calibration shot with a rattan weapon from the force level you propose. if your not sure what I am refering to...lets assume a rib shot...fairly common sca hit.
should it be a bruise?
a huge hanging hemotoma?
bruised ribs? (not a bruise on the rib but bruised ribs...there is a diference)
cracked ribs?
broken ribs?
other? (please define)
I'm just asking so i can respond without misunderstanding your point.

Ulrich

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sun Feb 17, 2002 12:00 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ulrich:
Ok...I'm going to do my best to make a reply based on an actual understanding of the force level Syr Rhys is refering to.

but to do that I need a tidbit of information.

what I need to know is simply If I'm wearing my SCA assumed harness (which i do have and do fight in) of Conical helm, Rivited Chain over a padded gambison with leather arm and leg protection...metal elbow cops..etc..using my sword and kite shield...what ammount of damage should I sustain to my body through that armor when you strike me with a "standard" calibration shot with a rattan weapon from the force level you propose. if your not sure what I am refering to...lets assume a rib shot...fairly common sca hit.
should it be a bruise?
a huge hanging hemotoma?
bruised ribs? (not a bruise on the rib but bruised ribs...there is a diference)
cracked ribs?
broken ribs?
other? (please define)
I'm just asking so i can respond without misunderstanding your point.

Ulrich<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

None of those bad things should happen. We're using rattan which doesn't cause the same damage that steel does (for one thing, our weapons have a lot wider striking edge than a steel sword, and for another rattan flexs a lot more).

We're talking about a level of force that *doesn't* cause damage if you're using rattan, but *does* if you're using steel. Clear now?

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sun Feb 17, 2002 12:10 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Auto:
and by that I mean Duke Micheal's, While I enjoy his incredible force, I wouldn't like to see it that hard always, in all tournys. Great for crown and ducal challenges, but too much (in my opinion) for local every day combat.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why is it "too much"?

I conceded to both your point that MY argument that "my period did it this way" is in no way more valid than your "my period did it this way"

Just a point of clarification, I never said my period was the only way to go, I used the fact that things were done differently in my period to show that you were wrong to make the blanket state you made, i.e., that to fight accurately the loser had to give up a valuable ransom.

I realize that punches were considered unmanly to medieval knights,

That's not correct; punches were perfectly acceptable in *unarmored* combat, they're just useless in armored combat (and all SCA combat is armored tournament combat). It's not a question of manliness, it's a question of *effectiveness*. They don't work, therefore knight wouldn't have used them.

2) That making micheal of bedfords calibration, while it may help the large heavy fighter in plate win more, will not improve the reality or authenticity of what we do.

First, since it will more closely replicate what was actually done, it *will* make our art more accurate, and second, I regularly fight at that level in nothing more than quilted armor. You don't need plate; it's just not that dangerous.

add 3) None of us (and I saw you say the same thing in response to another post) are truly authentic so the "real knights hit really really hard, so we should to in order to be authentic argument" is not really valid.

Then you *still* misunderstand me. That's *exactly my argument: Medieval knights hit really hard, so we should too to be more authentic, even if we can never be perfectly authentic. That argument is perfectly valid.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

Ulrich · Post by **Ulrich** » Sun Feb 17, 2002 12:55 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by SyrRhys:
 None of those bad things should happen. We're using rattan which doesn't cause the same damage that steel does (for one thing, our weapons have a lot wider striking edge than a steel sword, and for another rattan flexs a lot more).

We're talking about a level of force that *doesn't* cause damage if you're using rattan, but *does* if you're using steel. Clear now?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok. I agree rattan doesn't cause the same damage steel does. and I get the idea of a force level that does NOT cause damage using rattan but *does* if your using steel.

I'm confused however on how this can be achieved. (with rattan of course) using the powerlevel I _think_ your infering, through the SCA assumed armor (which as I've stated I have and fight in on occasion) without causing some version of the damage I listed above. (at the very least a bruise).

Ulrich
(truely trying to form an informed and incontext/understanding opinion on which to base a future post.)

Amalric Unomen · Post by **Amalric Unomen** » Sun Feb 17, 2002 4:16 am

Just a quick question, since you seem to have decided that East/Atlantia calibration is at least an acceptable baseline. How do two kingdoms bring fifteen others into line? I do not really think "fencing", "armoured tag", or "boffer combat" cracks very diplomatic or chivalrous.

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

"Heads up, by God! Those are bullets - not turds!" Colonel Lepic

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sun Feb 17, 2002 8:15 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Amalric Unomen:
Just a quick question, since you seem to have decided that East/Atlantia calibration is at least an acceptable baseline. How do two kingdoms bring fifteen others into line? I do not really think "fencing", "armoured tag", or "boffer combat" cracks very diplomatic or chivalrous.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wasn't the one who suggested any specific place's calibration level was the right one (I think all of them are a bit low on average).

I'll grant the terms you listed might be considered "undiplomatic" (who used "boffer fighting"? That's a good one!), but please show me the way in which they're unchivalrous. Start by reading Keen's _Chivalry_, and use that as the baseline for your argument.

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

SyrRhys · Post by **SyrRhys** » Sun Feb 17, 2002 8:23 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ulrich:

Ok. I agree rattan doesn't cause the same damage steel does. and I get the idea of a force level that does NOT cause damage using rattan but *does* if your using steel.

I'm confused however on how this can be achieved. (with rattan of course) using the powerlevel I _think_ your infering, through the SCA assumed armor (which as I've stated I have and fight in on occasion) without causing some version of the damage I listed above. (at the very least a bruise).

Ulrich
(truely trying to form an informed and incontext/understanding opinion on which to base a future post.)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, bruises are ineveitable; if that's one of the things you mentioned in your original post I apologize, I must have glossed over it, only seeing the more horrific injuries you mentioned.

As for how to do it, as I said, I often fight in just a lightly-quilted aketon and gamboissed cuisses (ask around, it's true!) with exactly the kinds of people we've been discussing (I was Duke Ronabld's squire!). *I* don't get hurt, so SCAdians wearing realistic amounts of protection shouldn't, either.

Of course, someone who's 4'2" and 95 lbs. who's never done anything seriously rigorous in their entire life might want better protection, but isn't that the way of the world?

Remember that the SCAs armor standard is the assumed level of protection for judging blows, it's not what they recommend you actually wear, especially if you're delicate enough to need better protection!

------------------
Hugh Knight
"Welcome to the Church of the Open Field, let us 'prey': Hunt hard, kill swiftly, waste nothing, make no apologies"

Auto · Post by **Auto** » Sun Feb 17, 2002 10:53 am

OK I think I see what Sir Rhys is saying now, and I will whole haertedly agree. The number of significant injuries in NFL football is very low when compared to the number of injuries in backyard, street, and high school football, yet they play the game exponentially harder. For an SCA fighter with the equivalent amount of training, exp., and preparation, and PROFESSIONAL DEDICATION the injury factor would be no different. If an SCA "pro league" were to be established then I would give my enthusistic support (and participation). But.. in all sports there is the peewee league, the community league, the high school, and college levels, where potential pro atheletes can gain the experience to get to the pro level, and the "I play just for fun" crowd can still participate in a competitive and rough and tumble game, without having to try and best troy aikman of brett farve. This is also the disagreement I am trying to make with Rhys. Lets assume rhys likes to play football in the park with his friends on weekends. No gear, no training (other than playing every weekend), but still tackling and such. they get banged and bruised, but they have a god time, and work hard. Now imagine that the NFL said that in order to make it more real for you. you had to play with NFL players, get professional quality gear (and I dont just mean allowable, I mean the exact same gear that the pro teams use), play on a full size field, all out 100% just like in a pro game. Would that make your weekend game more enjoyable, or would most if not all of your players simply stay home.
That is MY point. It takes time to get to the level of fighting that all the heroic dukes mentioned are at. Todays newbie in a$50 suit of armour that was a dear and labor intensive investment to them, can likely be tommorrows ronald or lucan. I think that what is being missed between both sides of this argument is the others perspective. When you get a belt or baldric you are expected to have a certain level of skill and poise, and good armour. You should enjoy fighting at the level Rhys advocates. But... those at that level have to remember where they came from, the buck newbie shouldn't be treated that way, nor expected to purchase a $1,000 kit, and if we disclude the newbie, when all the current chiv dies, there will be no more SCA combat.
As I said at the beginning of this post. If you are advocating an SCA "knightly list" as an opt in chance to fight with other high end fighters and to bang as hard as you can, with an only the strong survive mentality then you have my support, and can even count on my participation. You have to admit that having 6,000 fighters on the field at war certainly is more fun, than a war with just lucan, ronald, inman, morguhn, and micheal of bedford, (and of course rhys *friendly jibe*)

This is my umpteenth attempt to make this point did I succed this time?? We will wait and see

Also I am not gonna apologise for the myriad of typos, nor blame it on my worn out sticky keyed keyboard that i just wont seem to get rid of. I will satnd on the fact that I am nobility and not clergy, and my local brother thinks computers are th devils tools >

(that too was a joke, so dont flame me for being a heretic)

Richard Blackmoore · Post by **Richard Blackmoore** » Sun Feb 17, 2002 10:56 am

A clarification from my perspective.

When I talk about the calibration Duke's Lucan, Gregor, Ronald, Timothy and Sir Stephan von Dresdan use, I am referring to the typical level they accept in a Eastern tournament or pick up fight. This is based on my experiences when fighting with them in the East personally. While all of them prefer a firm blow, none of them needed to be struck with a tremendous amount of force. When playing the "high game" that Michael of Bedford was experimenting with at Pennsic a few years back, that was a significantly higher level of force than I was proposing. If that higher level is what you are recommending Sir Rhys, I respectfully disagree with your contention that the SCA is prepared to deal with that level of force. I would still play and have fun, but I would replace the remaining maille or leather on my kit and go to full plate. If Michael was landing the kind of blows on you that he landed on me and you are not getting fairly bad bruises in quilted armour, I suspect he was playing more at the typical Eastern/Atlantian level instead of the "high game" levels being discussed here.

This is why these discussions are so difficult. If we are not standing around in armour whacking each other with swords, it is hard to be sure what level of force a particular person is actually trying to indicate.

It has been my experience that the average calibration of the Chivalry in the East and Atlantia is what I personally feel is a safe, yet firm force level that works safely provided we wear armour and not T-shirts. It is my belief that many areas take much lighter than this and as a result, have stopped wearing armour. That is why I use terms such as fencing, boffer, LARP, unarmoured combat. It is not to be insulting, at least not most of the time

although I do get annoyed when newer areas try to say that we simply should not wear much armour and we should hit softer. As I have stated before, this is supposed to be armoured combat. There are plenty of other things you can do inside and outside of the SCA including boffer, LARP, fencing, etc. if you don't want to do armoured combat.

Is my way the one true way? No. Is hitting harder than I want to hit wrong? No. It is just different and I suspect most of the SCA including the chivalry does not want to go in that direction. Is hitting lighter than I hit wrong? Maybe. At some point it is no longer armoured combat if you go to light, it becomes a kata, a dance, an unrealistic combat more akin to stylized fencing than trying to strike correctly with a sword against an armoured opponent.

How do you bring other kingdoms in line? It is hard. That is why we have so many problems at inter-kingdom events. That is why there is currently an attempt to create a standardization committee to deal with exactly this problem. This is why we are having these discussions.

If another kingdom is wearing armour and wants a lighter standard that still somehow requires good technique, I will be skeptical but I do not say they are wrong, just different. If another kingdom wears little or no armour and wants to fight very light, I would say that is wrong within the SCA context. We are supposed to try to maintain at least a minimum level of inter-kingdom standardization so that we can play with each other and have the game be recognizable from one area to another, allowing for cultural differences that do not dramatically alter the overall concept of armoured combat.