The Armour Archive

i never said get rid of the pomp bryce. im talking strictly about the fighting itself. process in, wave banners, do all of it. i think its great. but dont make up stupid rules or retarded restrictions (we are seeing more and more of that here at home brother). leave the fighting the way it is, thats all im asking. we have an event coming up in which we can only use the front edge of the blade because someone thought it would be fun to "fight with middle eastern blades". wha? first not all blades in the middle east were single edged so the notion is flawed, but what sense does it make to pretend we are fighting with scmitars (while wearing our normal kits btw). it will lead to sloppy fighting that will be of no benefit to the skill or the training of the fighters. silly.

but thats all i was talking about and i have no issues with the other aspects of the pre and post fight.

regards
logan

BdeB wrote:

dukelogan wrote:
but this whole idea of creating our sport as some kind of silly fun thing to watch is beyond me. lets fight. the best man will be the winner and that is what it is. why screw with something so pure??

regards
logan

It's a fine line though....
Because the SCA is not, nor has it ever been just about the fighting. Nor should it be. Capturing the past, which included heraldry, pomp, courtesy, chivalry...those things are important.

We do agree that tourneys devised by non-fighters, or silly games created to make us look like fools are stupid and pointless. But SCA fighting is about so much more than just 'the contest'. There are many, many areas for people to compete in if competition is all that they crave.

I disagree that fighting need not be enjoyable and entertaining for the spectators however. We have lost so much of our culture to expediency and the attendance at our tourneys of spectators, ladies, heralds has dwindled away...Leaving two men standing in the middle of a bare field, alone in their contest.

That is not the SCA that I joined, nor have fostered and loved for nearly 20 years. It bores the hell out of me (to strip away all ceremony). And I’m not alone. Nearly anyone even cares about our fighting, except the day of Crown, when they wish to see who will be inflicted on them for six months. It's shameful that we have let our standards fall so low.

What can be done? Education and fostering of our new members. They are the future of the society and they will shape it into their needs. If other groups do a better job at that, then in ten years we will be a minority of grey haired men, striving in contests that no one cares about. Chivalry will be quaint heirloom of an older time.

Huh. That might be the most medieval thing we actually ever do....

Adriano wrote:Az -- maybe you should give Silver Hammer another try. I missed the past two years, but I'll be back there the 25th of this month, trying to fulfill my pledge to win the tourney with a greatsword. You could come laugh at me.

I had actually planned to go this year...but unfortunately, finances have decreed otherwise.

[quote="dukelogan"]but dont make up stupid rules or retarded restrictions (we are seeing more and more of that here at home brother). leave the fighting the way it is, thats all im asking. we have an event coming up in which we can only use the front edge of the blade because someone thought it would be fun to "fight with middle eastern blades". wha? first not all blades in the middle east were single edged so the notion is flawed, but what sense does it make to pretend we are fighting with scmitars (while wearing our normal kits btw). it will lead to sloppy fighting that will be of no benefit to the skill or the training of the fighters. silly.

[quote="dukelogan"]

Then we are in agreement. Let me know if I can share any resources I have with your MIC (Asfhin?) I have plenty of references to ME swords with double edges.

Gosh, the next thing you know they will want us to fight over sheep again. Or bring back Madus.....

At least here in the Midrealm, the format of the tourney is almost always published in advance, including any weapon stipulations other "house rules" for the event.

That way, people who don't want to participate don't have to.

Seems easy enough - if you don't want to fight under the rules for that tournament, don't go.

My vote for worst has to be a Caid run bear pit tourney at a Pennsic some 15 years ago.

The bear pit had 4 man teams, with no turn limit. A heavy combat archery tourney was schedualed for the same time. Some 2 archers showed for it. To make a long story short, the archers became a permanent part of field number 3. If you drew that field (ie standing in the front of the line when that field opened up) your team was assigned an archer. Our team had just won 19 fights in a row in our first round. Having lost #20 we waited in line to get our next chance. As some 25 teams fought in this tourney, that took a while.

We end up on field 3 and loose to the archer. The other team ran away from contact and our assigned archer was pegged right at the start. We were not allowed to strike the opposing archer, we could only win by killing the armored combatents, the ones running away. In the end the archer killed 3 of us. As we lost the tourney by one fight....

Still brings back bitter thoughts.

oh its not afshin, he is shaking his head just as hard as i am about this silliness. i will likely have a practice/cooking/tape review/darts and cards/drinking/mma/punch in the forehead game/ weekend here at the house. or ill just take the weekend off and relax.

regards
logan

BdeB wrote:

dukelogan wrote:but dont make up stupid rules or retarded restrictions (we are seeing more and more of that here at home brother). leave the fighting the way it is, thats all im asking. we have an event coming up in which we can only use the front edge of the blade because someone thought it would be fun to "fight with middle eastern blades". wha? first not all blades in the middle east were single edged so the notion is flawed, but what sense does it make to pretend we are fighting with scmitars (while wearing our normal kits btw). it will lead to sloppy fighting that will be of no benefit to the skill or the training of the fighters. silly.

dukelogan wrote:
Then we are in agreement. Let me know if I can share any resources I have with your MIC (Asfhin?) I have plenty of references to ME swords with double edges.

Gosh, the next thing you know they will want us to fight over sheep again. Or bring back Madus.....

Out of curiousity Your Grace, are you also opposed to tourneys like the Plate and Maille, Sword and Buckler, etc?

If the "silly" rules are only announced when the fighting is about to commence then I completely understand your frustration. However, if the "silly" rules are advertised before hand, why attend the event in the first place.

You may have answered these already. I confess I have not read this entire thread.

dukelogan wrote:the real issues are that we allow non-fighters to come up with bullshit they think is "fun" to watch or somehow "cool" or whatever.

i would rather we fight. we contest. we challenge each other.

the whole concept of this "honor the one whose favor you bear: is so silly to me. i have never fought in the sca for anyone but me. i challenge myself. nobody else. i dont fight for anyones honor. i assume each person i fight is a person of character and that we are both engaging in equal combat.

{freiman's snip}

regards
logan

We differ on this point.

The fighting to honor a lady is the thing I like most about this game. I don't think you are doing it wrong or anything, but for me, that's the best part.

Of course, that might be why you're a duke and I am a minstrel.

f

i dont attend the event. i am frustrated because i want all activities on the field to improve our sport. improve it so that we can be better. i dont know what plate and maille tourneys are, sword and buckler is silly. well, not silly for the three or four men that i know that can actually fight with a buckler. but silly for the rest of us. why make men fight with things they dont normally fight with? whats the point? what does it solve? what does it improve? nothing....... nothing at all.

of course this is just my opinion and my opinion is worth less than a free cup of dust. i just want to get better and i just want to train folks to push me and push themselves. i love our sport.

regards
logan

Vladimir wrote:Out of curiousity Your Grace, are you also opposed to tourneys like the Plate and Maille, Sword and Buckler, etc?

If the "silly" rules are only announced when the fighting is about to commence then I completely understand your frustration. However, if the "silly" rules are advertised before hand, why attend the event in the first place.

You may have answered these already. I confess I have not read this entire thread.

dukelogan wrote:why make men fight with things they dont normally fight with? whats the point? what does it solve? what does it improve? nothing....... nothing at all.

with respect, your grace, i'd say that it would improve one's skill. Versatility and improvisation are pretty important skills for effective fighters.

sword and buckler seemed to work well enough at the time I.33 was written - why should we not seek mastery in it, as well?

umm ok. i will fight anyone that wants to use a little buckler. best of 70. i win 84%. any takers......

fact is forcing us to do odd shit is, well, odd. there is no improvement in skill when you force someone to do something else.

regards
logan

hrolf wrote:

dukelogan wrote:why make men fight with things they dont normally fight with? whats the point? what does it solve? what does it improve? nothing....... nothing at all.

with respect, your grace, i'd say that it would improve one's skill. Versatility and improvisation are pretty important skills for effective fighters.

sword and buckler seemed to work well enough at the time I.33 was written - why should we not seek mastery in it, as well?

Now there's a fighter practice I'd drive a hundred miles to get to...

dukelogan wrote: i will likely have a practice/cooking/tape review/darts and cards/drinking/mma/punch in the forehead game/ weekend here at the house.
regards
logan

RoaK wrote:Now there's a fighter practice I'd drive a hundred miles to get to...

dukelogan wrote: i will likely have a practice/cooking/tape review/darts and cards/drinking/mma/punch in the forehead game/ weekend here at the house.
regards
logan

as long as I have some really stout cuisses.

hrolf wrote:

dukelogan wrote:why make men fight with things they dont normally fight with? whats the point? what does it solve? what does it improve? nothing....... nothing at all.

with respect, your grace, i'd say that it would improve one's skill. Versatility and improvisation are pretty important skills for effective fighters.

sword and buckler seemed to work well enough at the time I.33 was written - why should we not seek mastery in it, as well?

I disagree. I don't think that silly weapons tournaments make us more successful or "better" SCA fighters. They may help us improve skills that allow us to be better able to fight with more weapons, but they certainly don't make us more successful, unless there are suddenly more silly weapons tournaments.

Since we don't fight for real, and we bring to the field the weapons we choose to have fighting with "whatever" has little or no affect on how good we are, as it is not really a test of how good we are in the SCA- since those are not the general terms we fight under. For individuals, they may think or feel that makes them better fighters, but that is not how the rules are structured. It is kind of like the people who think various factors make SCA fighting more "real. SCA fighting is a sport with martial aspects. It'll never be "real." it is fun, and with the skills learned you can potentially fight well in a rel life situation, but SCA isn't "for real." Needing silly weapons skills, or CA or whatever might make your personal experience better, but it does not make you better in the SCA.

Don't play ping pong to win tennis.

Unless you are Sauron, your ability to fight with double greatswords will never make you better able to beat me when I pick up my sword nd shield.

g-

Lachlann wrote:

white mountain armoury wrote:I don’t know who was responsible but it has historic precedent.
Although its not like you got to keep her
You would lead your lady to the field, if you were beaten your opponent had the honor of leading her off.

I know this wasnt your idea but um..no. I have fought for girlfriends and friends who were girls but the idea of allowing anyone else to "lead her off" without my being actually dead or so wounded as to be completely incapable of movement makes me want to vomit. I know its just a game but even in games certain lines will not be crossed by me. This is one of the reasons I hate standard SCA tourney.

Agreed. My Lady is Mine and Mine alone. I don't share.

No, I'm not an only child

Never been forced to fight any style.

I'll fight other forms because they are fun, but I've never been forced to.


Of course, fun is the only reason we should be doing this, right?


.

not for me. i do enjoy sca sport combat, please dont misunderstand, but its not fun. to me "fun" is sitting in an inflatable chair in the pool with a fruity vodka drink. that is fun. it requires me to do nothing. i "enjoy" sca sport combat because it allows me to test myself in a very unique way. it allows me to engage in contest with other men at something violent without fear of harm. it allows me to play human chess on a grand scale.

sitting around camp sharing a beer with old and new friends is fun. fighting isnt.

regards
logan

Dilan wrote:Never been forced to fight any style.

I'll fight other forms because they are fun, but I've never been forced to.


Of course, fun is the only reason we should be doing this, right?


.

Eh, different strokes, I guess.


.

dukelogan wrote:the whole concept of this "honor the one whose favor you bear: is so silly to me. i have never fought in the sca for anyone but me.

Interesting. Logan, how did you reconcile this attitude with entering Crown List?

I've learned a lot from this thread, in case I ever try running a fighting event again. So often, simpler is better.

how so?

regards
logan

Adriano wrote:

dukelogan wrote:the whole concept of this "honor the one whose favor you bear: is so silly to me. i have never fought in the sca for anyone but me.

Interesting. Logan, how did you reconcile this attitude with entering Crown List?

I've learned a lot from this thread, in case I ever try running a fighting event again. So often, simpler is better.

Not to butt in but I bet ya 10 bucks it's; "when you fight in crown you're fighting for the honor of your lady to be queen"...

I'm sure many of your peers in the SCA have that attitude and that's good for them. But I agree with you... Nothing wrong with fighting to put yourself on the throne... and yeah... you bring a lady along to be queen (which is important also).

Nothing wrong with that...

dukelogan wrote:how so?

regards
logan

Adriano wrote:

dukelogan wrote:the whole concept of this "honor the one whose favor you bear: is so silly to me. i have never fought in the sca for anyone but me.

Interesting. Logan, how did you reconcile this attitude with entering Crown List?

I've learned a lot from this thread, in case I ever try running a fighting event again. So often, simpler is better.

i compete in crown in the hope that i will be able to serve the kingdom and the sca in that position. i pick my consorts by whomever i think will serve the kingdom best. my first two reigns i fought for duchess arielle (my lady at the time). my second two were with duchess isabel (my squires wife). my last was with countess rowan (a long time friend of mine). this time i will be fighting for my lady. my point is that ive never foguht for them but rather for us to have the opportunity to serve.

regards
logan

RoaK wrote:Not to butt in but I bet ya 10 bucks it's; "when you fight in crown you're fighting for the honor of your lady to be queen"...

I'm sure many of your peers in the SCA have that attitude and that's good for them. But I agree with you... Nothing wrong with fighting to put yourself on the throne... and yeah... you bring a lady along to be queen (which is important also).

Nothing wrong with that...

dukelogan wrote:how so?

regards
logan

Adriano wrote:

dukelogan wrote:the whole concept of this "honor the one whose favor you bear: is so silly to me. i have never fought in the sca for anyone but me.

Interesting. Logan, how did you reconcile this attitude with entering Crown List?

I've learned a lot from this thread, in case I ever try running a fighting event again. So often, simpler is better.

I actually agree with Logan on both accounts, and Alaric.

As far as the plate and mail and such. Just not my cup of tea, if folks enjoy it, have fun. But I dont particular think it helps our sport. It might be more like how they fought, maybe. But well we dont exactly do that, do we. Our sport is our own unique thing, and will probably always will be. Its not medieval fighting perse, its kind of like it, but not. Its a modern sport, under the pretense of medieval fighting. But for most in it, they wear sports gear of some typem to achieve the goals.

And as far as fun. Well I actually have fun with the competition, but Im not as intense as Logan. Which is probably why he is Duke more than twice over, as I have just got the finals once and the semis a few times. :p

As far as Crowns, I have pretty much fought them for the same reasons. Granted, this is my own take, not Logans. But I have always fought to put both us on the throne, and to do things for the kingdom. Not for some romantic reason to see whoever I am fighting for. Not even with my ex-wife. Granted, lately, have been fighting for a friend, who I think will do a good job with me, if I ever win. But if one day, I decide to fight for someone I am dating or married to, if I ever get married again (highly doubtful) . It will be to put both of us on the throne.

Then again, I am one who wishes I didnt have to have a consort to fight in Crowns.

edit - By the way, when I say I agree with Logan and Alaric, I mean I agree with what I think they meant. I could be wrong, and they differ from what I posted. I am making sure I dont put words into folks mouths, like I have a tendency to do. :p

when it comes down to who the cool kids are i think alaric and i are the leaders of the pack. you should always agree with us!!

in all seriousness, while i find the concept of fighting for someons honor or someones worth or whatever to be goofy i should clarify.

if thats what you do (you being anyone not finn) then thats cool. dont fight me because of your womans honor, i never questioned it. well, at least, in the sca sport fighting concept. if i think your woman is a toad i will tell both of you that. if you want to fight me over it i think thats stupid and will inform you of that opinion. if you still want to fight it wont be some pretend sca fight and i promise you we will bleed. i dont do d&d stuff, i dont pretend things. i also dont fight people over words, only actions or threat of actions. so the whole concept of fighting for someone to me is silly.


regards
logan

SyrFinn wrote:I actually agree with Logan on both accounts, and Alaric.

As far as the plate and mail and such. Just not my cup of tea, if folks enjoy it, have fun. But I dont particular think it helps our sport. It might be more like how they fought, maybe. But well we dont exactly do that, do we. Our sport is our own unique thing, and will probably always will be. Its not medieval fighting perse, its kind of like it, but not. Its a modern sport, under the pretense of medieval fighting. But for most in it, they wear sports gear of some typem to achieve the goals.

And as far as fun. Well I actually have fun with the competition, but Im not as intense as Logan. Which is probably why he is Duke more than twice over, as I have just got the finals once and the semis a few times. :p

As far as Crowns, I have pretty much fought them for the same reasons. Granted, this is my own take, not Logans. But I have always fought to put both us on the throne, and to do things for the kingdom. Not for some romantic reason to see whoever I am fighting for. Not even with my ex-wife. Granted, lately, have been fighting for a friend, who I think will do a good job with me, if I ever win. But if one day, I decide to fight for someone I am dating or married to, if I ever get married again (highly doubtful) . It will be to put both of us on the throne.

Then again, I am one who wishes I didnt have to have a consort to fight in Crowns.

edit - By the way, when I say I agree with Logan and Alaric, I mean I agree with what I think they meant. I could be wrong, and they differ from what I posted. I am making sure I dont put words into folks mouths, like I have a tendency to do. :p

I agree with Logan regarding his reasons for fighting in Crown. Being perennially single, I have only had the opportunity to fight for "My Lady" in Crown 1 time out of the 7 times I have fought in Crown. The other 6 times I have fought for great women, all of whom I agreed to fight for for various reasons.

I would never fight in Crown if I didn't want to win. I will never fight in Crown again if I don't want to serve. Whom I fight for is someone whom I feel will do a great job as Queen, and I will be able to serve with well. I advance their honor in Crown when I do fight, but don't for a second think that I am solely doing it for them- I do it for me, her, us, and the Kingdom. If any one of those things doesn't work or desire us, then I don't fight.

g-

You know, I never thought of it as "fighting to defend my lady's honor", but fighting "in honor of the inspiration that my lady gives me" - even if she is just "my lady" for that tourney.

Of course, I've only kept one prize from any tournament I've ever won - a token when I became Baronial Champion. Everything else I've given to the person who I was lucky enough to be inspired by that day.


And if the SCA fighting community left fighting "just the way it was" - the game would be VASTLY different from what we enjoy now, IMO. In terms of armor, weaponry and techniques.

Sword and buckler tourneys? How else do those "2 or 3 guys" learn to use it? For fighters who want to experience combat closer to what it was really like, tournaments like Plate and Mail, or the Combat of Thirty gives them that chance. If people are wanting to try something other than the "same old / same old" tournament, why not? Maybe they'll hit on something. That's in part how the Rose Tourney and the ToC got started in the Midrealm.


Might be different motivations or reasons, but it isn't wrong, or less valid, in my opinion.

.

Hi,

The worst tournament I’ve gone to is the only one I even won.

There was an event in the East Kingdom in the late Fall in 2003, and while it was primarily an archery and fencing event, they also said they’d have a heavy weapons tournament. So I drove out there by myself, packing my 109 lbs of armour (first suit I built myself…think Iron Man Mark 1, but built by an idiot) and it was raining to sleeting, with sporadic breaks in the weather.

I got there and quickly (30 minutes) got into armour and walked out to find out where the tournament was. Nobody knew where it would be but someone said, “near that treeâ€

snipped for brevity

SyrFinn wrote:...As far as the plate and mail and such. Just not my cup of tea, if folks enjoy it, have fun. But I dont particular think it helps our sport. ...

Must every tourney be designed only to "help our sport" (which I interpret as increasing the martial skill of attending fighters)? There are plenty of tourneys with a strictly martial aspect and weekly practices which do exactly that.

Is there anything inherently wrong with having occasional oddball tourneys for those who wish to do nothing more than have fun (or a pleasant experience) in armour? As long as the rules are made known well beforehand of course. If you don't like those particular tourney rules, then don't attend that particular tourney. There are plenty of others.

Nah, your right Vlad. Not every tourney needs to be. Which is why I said I dont mind them, just not my cup of tea. But I still stand by, that I dont think it necessarily helps the martial aspect of the sport.

Then again, for me personally, I just think it looks weird, and not aesthetically pleasing. When i think of a shield, I think of a shield, not a little buckler. Specially when I think of someone in plate. It might be historically accurate, dont know, but just something in my head, clicks and thinks it just looks weird.

Kind of like showing up to a drag race against muscle cars with a VW.

I rather like the plate and mail tournament.

Speaking of wierd weapons turneys...

What's wierd? It looks like a mace to me.

It is an orange in a sock. Very sticky death.

It's a sock; with an orange in it...

Vladimir wrote:What's wierd? It looks like a mace to me.

Yeah, grill shots were a real bitch

Nissan Maxima wrote:It is an orange in a sock. Very sticky death.