The Armour Archive

Animal wrote:I wonder why you cant have a sheild? That's stupid. Archers carried sheilds all the time, didnt they? What's the reasoning behind the SCA stipulation about no sheilds? I got this way cool Mongol bowcase thing I stitched up so that when the arrows run out or we go to close, I can sheathe the bow and draw the saber, grab the sheild off the strap ( thanks Richard) and go. What's the harm in that?

Animal:

Why don't you get a spun aluminum round (like Master Jamie sells from By My Hand Designs)? You could wear it on your arm while firing the bow (shielding yourself from counter-archery fire), and sheathe the bow in the case, then draw your saber when the bad guys get too close.

There are dozens of iconographic sources showing Ilkhanid and Timurid Mongols firing bows while wearing a round shield on the forearm. Give it some thought.

Templar Bob/De Tyre wrote:

Animal wrote:I wonder why you cant have a sheild? That's stupid. Archers carried sheilds all the time, didnt they? What's the reasoning behind the SCA stipulation about no sheilds? I got this way cool Mongol bowcase thing I stitched up so that when the arrows run out or we go to close, I can sheathe the bow and draw the saber, grab the sheild off the strap ( thanks Richard) and go. What's the harm in that?

Animal:

Why don't you get a spun aluminum round (like Master Jamie sells from By My Hand Designs)? You could wear it on your arm while firing the bow (shielding yourself from counter-archery fire), and sheathe the bow in the case, then draw your saber when the bad guys get too close.

There are dozens of iconographic sources showing Ilkhanid and Timurid Mongols firing bows while wearing a round shield on the forearm. Give it some thought.

T-Bob,
The problem with that, and it's an idea I love, is, in some kingdoms, a shield NOT controlled by the hand is considered armor and subject to be lost at the first strike. I was going for that plan until I found out the specifics.
-M

Madok ap Gruffydd wrote:T-Bob,

The problem with that, and it's an idea I love, is, in some kingdoms, a shield NOT controlled by the hand is considered armor and subject to be lost at the first strike. I was going for that plan until I found out the specifics.
-M

That's the beauty of having a hand grip that you can access when danger is close. Then, the shield is controlled by the hand. It's a style that worked for the entire medieval period--and can work here, too!

Templar Bob/De Tyre wrote:

Madok ap Gruffydd wrote:T-Bob,

The problem with that, and it's an idea I love, is, in some kingdoms, a shield NOT controlled by the hand is considered armor and subject to be lost at the first strike. I was going for that plan until I found out the specifics.
-M

That's the beauty of having a hand grip that you can access when danger is close. Then, the shield is controlled by the hand. It's a style that worked for the entire medieval period--and can work here, too!

Ohhhhh! I get it. That's a great idea. Can I borrow that?

Where would one find a link or pic that Master Jamie sells from By My Hand Designs?

Scratch that, I found it

Max range on my xbow (golf tube+tennisball) is about 40yds or so. So my point-blank shooting is almost indirect fire.

Tessa wrote:Now I'm all for making battles more fun for all. I've found that when people train against and with archers on a regular basis, that they are much more effective and the archers are much less effective. Just picking up a shield will drastically decrease an archers effectiveness. Can you stand in the front ranks with a spear, with CA on the field? No.. can you still be highly effective with a spear if you work with your shieldmen? Yes..

Given some time to adapt to the presence of missile weapons, eventually the SCA will come to grips with it. After all, the presence of massed blocks of pike, flanked by shot to either side, is a battle formation used well within the SCA's period. Yeah, you'll lose some pike to opposing shot, but that's why the Swiss developed that cool square that lasted the next 150 years. When volumes of fire increased, thanks to trained, veteran musketeers, pike fell by the wayside in favour of Line formations, but massed columns of men were still used in mid-C19.

All SCA units need to do is get a spear/pike block, and get their own archers for the flanks. Protect those archers with a unit of heavies for protection, and you'll roll.

I'd like to find that website from Master Jamie, please.
Thanks.

Found it!

Talan Gwyllt wrote:NOTE; THIS IS MEANT TONGUE IN CHEEK. CHEERFUL SMACK WILL BE TALKED. UNTWIST YOUR PANTIES.

I have no hearldry as of yet. But find the shire of hartshorn dale. Seek out Talan. I will be happy to chat/fight/talk silly smack talk with you.

Should I put a lable on my helm that reads "baby seal"?

Ok, mental note...kill everyone I find from Hartshorn-Dale....aw, WAIT A MINNIT! Y'all are Easterners! I can't kill you, we're on your side! Hm. Maybe there will be a friendship battle.....ho, ho. Barring that, we'll have a beer sometime. Spear & Beer! Hooray!

Kidding aside, I'd never 'baby seal' you, Talan, or anyone else. I'll just dispatch you with the quick efficiency Atlantians are known for......

Wow... I baby seal people all the time! Kinda fun really... for me

baronalejandro wrote:

Talan Gwyllt wrote:NOTE; THIS IS MEANT TONGUE IN CHEEK. CHEERFUL SMACK WILL BE TALKED. UNTWIST YOUR PANTIES.

I have no hearldry as of yet. But find the shire of hartshorn dale. Seek out Talan. I will be happy to chat/fight/talk silly smack talk with you.

Should I put a lable on my helm that reads "baby seal"?

Ok, mental note...kill everyone I find from Hartshorn-Dale....aw, WAIT A MINNIT! Y'all are Easterners! I can't kill you, we're on your side! Hm. Maybe there will be a friendship battle.....ho, ho. Barring that, we'll have a beer sometime. Spear & Beer! Hooray!

Kidding aside, I'd never 'baby seal' you, Talan, or anyone else. I'll just dispatch you with the quick efficiency Atlantians are known for......

HA HA HA! Tell you what, your spear and my crossbow and we can dispatch all the enemies of the east together. Then have a beer. Animal is invited of course. Hopefully we won't find you on a spear of the east.

Hi Tessa.

No one is disputing that archers were effective or that they sometimes shot using non-volley fire. We are disputing the effectiveness of archers using bows against the fully armoured nobility and chivalry in combat. With the exception of shooting a fully armoured knight/noble in the face if he had an open face helm, we simply see zero evidence in period of knights/nobles being killed or even seriously wounded in the medieval period. The exceptions to this are noted in great detail as in: Someone did not have a piece of armour, it was not fastened correctly so there was a gap or the armour had a defect/pre-existing damage resulting in a failure.

Several times archivers have asked for documentation of nobles being killed or seriously injured by either volley fire or a single archer attacking them, where the arrow (not crossbow bolt) managed to go through armour in normal condition. None were posted.

People did post instances of severe bruising or minor puncture injuries that led to potentially lethal infections, that does not count.

No one is disputing that archery could kill or injure poorly armoured or unarmoured individuals or animals such as horses. No one is disputing that volley fire would not cause mounted knights to avoid archers and affect a battle.

So maybe we are comparing apples to oranges, sorry if I did not make my points clear before.

Richard

Richard Blackmore said:

We are disputing the effectiveness of archers using bows against the fully armoured nobility and chivalry in combat. *snip* The exceptions to this are noted in great detail as in: Someone did not have a piece of armour, it was not fastened correctly so there was a gap or the armour had a defect/pre-existing damage resulting in a failure.

I know that here in Ansteorra all Heavy combatants are presumed to be wearing maille and an open face helm as armor and that all blows are to be counted as such. I'm unsure about the other Kingdoms so YMMV, but that kind of negates the plate is proof theory as there is no plate on the field as per the rules here.

TO THOSE WHO ARE LOOKING FOR "BY MY HAND" SPUN ALUMINUM ROUND SHIELDS:

I was visiting Captain Jamie last evening, and noticed that he had some spun rounds still in stock. It'd probably be a good idea for any of you who want one to drop him an e-mail (he subtly hints to Animal).

I'd be interested seeing how one straps both for the arm and for a hand-grip, since I'll be working on rawhide shields later this summer.

R.B. -- At the battle of Lake Meli (1350 or 1352, my notes are at home), fifty Cuman and Szekely horse archers defeated three times their number of knights under the command of Louis of Taranto, when the latter tried to pull a quick one on the Hungarian king. I doubt the chronicler actually goes into detail. This doesn't mean diddly for the specific discussion you're having, but I'm trying to get access to the primary source material for it, and since it's 14th-century, I'll share it with everybody when I do.

the arguments about the armor standard of the sca and how effective arrows were against them is often clouded by comparisons of armor to arrows that were much beyond that time. people with an agenda tend to discount the fact that armor was improved as weapons were improved to defeat it. if armor was not effective nobody would employ its weight and cost.

im not attaching these comments to anything that decalmont is saying. only that the fact that armor improved is often overlooked by those that enjoy the gross imbalance of combat archery to the sport of sca combat.

regards
logan

DeCalmont wrote:Richard Blackmore said:

We are disputing the effectiveness of archers using bows against the fully armoured nobility and chivalry in combat. *snip* The exceptions to this are noted in great detail as in: Someone did not have a piece of armour, it was not fastened correctly so there was a gap or the armour had a defect/pre-existing damage resulting in a failure.

I know that here in Ansteorra all Heavy combatants are presumed to be wearing maille and an open face helm as armor and that all blows are to be counted as such. I'm unsure about the other Kingdoms so YMMV, but that kind of negates the plate is proof theory as there is no plate on the field as per the rules here.

Heheh thanks T Bob. And if I ever get money again I'll certainly get one. Even with the awesome insurance the Ratty has we're still kinda floored by the expense of her little romp through the hospital and Conor's luxury stay in the 4 star NICU. And with the co-pays of the specialists it's an adventure, just sayin.
The upside is that Conor had a follw up with the OTPT therapists the other day and their pronouncement of his progress was "Amazing". he's actually developing in advance of his adjusted age. So the expense is worth it Just means I dont get any new toys for a while. No worries

The reason some combat archers yield when you get into weapons range is they HAVE to!

In the Middle, they are allowed to wear just a half gaunlet on their draw hand - the trade off is, if an opponent gets in weapons range, they are dead due to "armour failure" - not having legal hand protection.

A fleet of foot sword and shield guy can kill 5 or 6 combat archers in that many seconds....

Dilan

Irish wrote:A fleet of foot sword and shield guy can kill 5 or 6 combat archers in that many seconds....

Dilan

...unless they're armed and are prepared to meet them--some combat archers ain't afeared of gettin' hit!

Come whack me. I expect nothing less when I enter a melee. But would you give me the chance to put away my crossbow and allow me to draw swords when you come into range? Or should I walk around the Pennsic field with crossbow in hand and a sticker on my helm that reads "CA = Baby Seal"?

i assume you are kidding right? there is no way i would hesitate so that you could draw a sword. why should anyone?

and. a sticker on your car maybe, but not one your helm.

regards
logan

Talan Gwyllt wrote:Come whack me. I expect nothing less when I enter a melee. But would you give me the chance to put away my crossbow and allow me to draw swords when you come into range? Or should I walk around the Pennsic field with crossbow in hand and a sticker on my helm that reads "CA = Baby Seal"?

Ya know, in the rush of a battle I seriously wouldnt expect someone to give me a chance to draw my saber. Doesnt mean I wouldnt try. I've never yeilded and never will. But honestly if he did a corner blitz and got into my backfield in the middle of a battle I'd fully expect him to use the advantage he earned and do me. If roles were reversed I certainly would do him.
Just a note, having been a heavy fighter since 83 I totally sympathize with the attitudes towards bullcrap archery conventions. I've done CA once. ONCE mind you. It's a blast but I totally understand the nuclear arrow, limb=death crap. I wouldnt expect you to die if I glanced an arrow off your arm or something. That's just dumb. Understand, you cant get real in what we do. People would die for real. But you gota try and get it as close as you can, right? Arrows glance, they dont kill. Arrows hit non vital places, they dont kill. I wouldnt expect to die from it I wouldnt expect you to either. Just sayin. It can be fun, even for knights and the like. Compromises must be made. THat's my opinion anyway.

that point has been made over and over and over and over again animal but it falls on deaf ears. it causes cries of unfair anytime it is suggested that arrows are not the "bringers of death" that many like to think they are or were. an arrow that touches my stomach on an sca field kills me. a sword doesnt, always. its really silly. but anytime a suggestion is made to bring some level of balance into the equation it is attacked and the suggestor labled and insulted (you should join a few of the combat archery lists. feh!).

one day it will simply be banned i fear. no compromise on one side will equal the removal of tolerance from the other. that will be its death. i will hate to see it happen because i like the addition of combat archery and think it can be made to be a welcomed part of the expirence. but i am one of a slowly dying number of supporters.

regards
logan

Animal wrote:Ya know, in the rush of a battle I seriously wouldnt expect someone to give me a chance to draw my saber. Doesnt mean I wouldnt try. I've never yeilded and never will. But honestly if he did a corner blitz and got into my backfield in the middle of a battle I'd fully expect him to use the advantage he earned and do me. If roles were reversed I certainly would do him.
Just a note, having been a heavy fighter since 83 I totally sympathize with the attitudes towards bullcrap archery conventions. I've done CA once. ONCE mind you. It's a blast but I totally understand the nuclear arrow, limb=death crap. I wouldnt expect you to die if I glanced an arrow off your arm or something. That's just dumb. Understand, you cant get real in what we do. People would die for real. But you gota try and get it as close as you can, right? Arrows glance, they dont kill. Arrows hit non vital places, they dont kill. I wouldnt expect to die from it I wouldnt expect you to either. Just sayin. It can be fun, even for knights and the like. Compromises must be made. THat's my opinion anyway.

I really sympathize with y'all having to work up those rules... I've read enough back and forth to see, as Charny would have said "many good arguments made on both sides." ...the only reason we can get away with the skirmishing we do witht he much-less-friendly arrows and lighter armor is that we know everybody... and I still felt like poo when I nailed one of the other side's (totally unhelmed, as was I) archers right under the nose...

my fear is that one sides proponents are so often filled with emotion, anger, venom, what have you that there will not be a working up of the rules. but rather an edict. i am afraid it will have to come to that as long as the few calm, yet vocal, heads on the pro "combat archery as it currently stands" side allow those big mouthed aggressive types speak for their whole community. if that does, indeed, become the way things are handled it will simply be a case of telling people how the game will be played instead of calm reasoned debate used to serve everyone. a bunch of people will throw their hands up, join the crowd of uninformed peer haters, and bitch about it until no one will bother listening anymore. not that i mind that. but the next wave will come in and be able to enjoy the game with everyone else.

or else, my biggest fear, it will all just be stopped dead.

regards
logan

Russ Mitchell wrote:I really sympathize with y'all having to work up those rules... I've read enough back and forth to see, as Charny would have said "many good arguments made on both sides." ...the only reason we can get away with the skirmishing we do with the much-less-friendly arrows and lighter armor is that we know everybody... and I still felt like poo when I nailed one of the other side's (totally unhelmed, as was I) archers right under the nose...

Your Grace:

It seems that the best way to change CA to where it "makes more sense" as Sir Richard Blackmoore says, would be to make an overhaul on how armour is judged. Plate harnesses would have to be "proof" against most forms of archery, and (more importantly) such rules would have to be rigidly enforced by the Marshallate. Perhaps a poll of all authorized combatants in the various kingdoms would do the trick?

This would also have to be applied to the "indestructable shield", but that's yet another tar-baby for the Marshallate....

Your Grace,

You state that if a sword touches your stomach area you are not dead yet if a arrow does you are then dead. I am assuming (which I hate to do) that you are refering to the amount of force difference involved. My only statement to that fact is due to the safety needs of the game. We are allowed a maximum 30lb draw in Ansteorra which packs a pretty good hit up close but due to Mr. Science the amount of energy left to hit you with at a distance is substantially less. Would that arrow have been deadly at a distance originally, probably I think, hence the rule for if a arrow hits you squarely without skipping it should be considered a good hit to the affected area.

Maybe to help dispell any questions we all could list the exact problems we have with CA that way we all know exactly where the problems lie. This way we can address the problems one by one and hopefully come to an understanding.

but that still will not get rid of the fact that arrows simply touch and they are considered devastating (in most kingdoms). nor will it get rid of the fact that arrows violate almost every rule that all other weapons must adhere to (in most kingdoms). nor does it deal with the fact that arrows are not controlled weapons.

personally i like the idea of going to a face only convention with arrows. no questions about historical this or historical that and little doubt that you were hit. and, it actually requires skill and that will deal with many of the issues fighters have about combat archery.

sca sport combat is not intended to be a replication of period fighting. the rules simply have created it as its own competitive sport. combat archery as it is practiced currently removes the main structures of that sport. honorable combat is impossible with combat archery (watch the knees jerk about wildly after that statement). while i am ok with that to an extent i have a real issue with the aforementioned disparities to the game on the field.

dealing with changes in armor, who decides what is plate and what isnt, and all of the interpretations of all the rules that would have to be added to an already over regulated sport would, i think, be a nightmare. not saying it couldnt be done, but it would be a huge undertaking. it would also disallow many of the diverse and interesting personas of study to take the field without the disadvantage that nuclear arrows would cause. that imbalance is already there but it applies to everyone right now.

i dont see why there is a fight against face only shots or even the face only kills any other legal shots cause the fighter to go to a res point. well actually i do but its not pc to speak of it.

so i dont think that is the way to go personally. leaves a lot of sway in how one regulates the armor standard.

regards
logan

Templar Bob/De Tyre wrote:Your Grace:

It seems that the best way to change CA to where it "makes more sense" as Sir Richard Blackmoore says, would be to make an overhaul on how armour is judged. Plate harnesses would have to be "proof" against most forms of archery, and (more importantly) such rules would have to be rigidly enforced by the Marshallate. Perhaps a poll of all authorized combatants in the various kingdoms would do the trick?

This would also have to be applied to the "indestructable shield", but that's yet another tar-baby for the Marshallate....

you are correct. i, for one, dont want to see arrows be required to hit with the same force as swords. they simply are far too dangerous as they are even with the limited poundages. that being thin shafted arrows not the big golf tube things which i hate. i am willing to take the risk of the thin shafted arrows since the rules have thankfully been well thought out and i believe that combat archers are willing to take the steps to ensure their gear is in top form or they would not fire them at us.

but the fact is that an arrow is simply not that deadly. anyone that has hunted with them knows that. if you doubt me go find yourself a large male anything in the woods and shoot it in the gut. but in the sca armor is disregarded as is force when it comes to arrow shots. and that, plainly, is silly. but where to draw the line? i dont want them having to hit harder and even then the argument still stands that arrows did not defeat armor. sure there are paintings of guys with arrows sticking out of them and blah blah blah. but that isnt proof of anything except an arrow got stuck in some armor. but regardless, not every arrow kills its target on contact, except, in the sca.

that is imbalance. plain and simple.

you mention too that while up close an arrow hits hard but at range it doesnt hit as hard. then you opined that you think it would still be deadly in reality. i hope you see that is flawed and i know that you realize that it doesnt matter in the sca anyway. and that is part of the problem as well.



regards
logan

DeCalmont wrote:Your Grace,

You state that if a sword touches your stomach area you are not dead yet if an arrow does you are then dead. I am assuming (which I hate to do) that you are refering to the amount of force difference involved. My only statement to that fact is due to the safety needs of the game. We are allowed a maximum 30lb draw in Ansteorra which packs a pretty good hit up close but due to Mr. Science the amount of energy left to hit you with at a distance is substantially less. Would that arrow have been deadly at a distance originally, probably I think, hence the rule for if a arrow hits you squarely without skipping it should be considered a good hit to the affected area.

Maybe to help dispell any questions we all could list the exact problems we have with CA that way we all know exactly where the problems lie. This way we can address the problems one by one and hopefully come to an understanding.

dukelogan wrote:but the fact is that an arrow is simply not that deadly. anyone that has hunted with them knows that. if you doubt me go find yourself a large male anything in the woods and shoot it in the gut. but in the sca armor is disregarded as is force when it comes to arrow shots. and that, plainly, is silly. but where to draw the line? i dont want them having to hit harder and even then the argument still stands that arrows did not defeat armor. sure there are paintings of guys with arrows sticking out of them and blah blah blah. but that isnt proof of anything except an arrow got stuck in some armor. but regardless, not every arrow kills its target on contact, except, in the sca.

that is imbalance. plain and simple.]

You know Logan, you just helped me to clarify the problem I have with the current CA rules.

We treat arrows like they are bullets. It's our modern sensibilties intefering...think about it.

On our field, in my experience the Crossbow is far more dangerous than the longbow. Why? Because our archers use it like a sniper with a gun.

And like a gun, if you get hit with it, you are pretty much out of the fight.

I was told at Gulf Wars that they were some Kingdoms where the arrows have to land as hard as a telling blow to be good. Here at home, at least, if the head hits you, you are dead/legged/armed.

I don't have any solutions to this, just the observation...

I don't see how there is a good solution. If we require that an arrow hits as hard as a blow, the poundages would be insanely high. Espically if we really do move to vollyfire (which i'd love to see anyway cos' it would be much cooler)

As it is, you just have to suck it up and take the glance for the walk. Either that or shoot archery yourself...

Normally, i'm not against archery. But i'll tell ya, after taking that walk in the ravine over and over from CA, I switched to my shield.

And some of those crossbows out there? They are way above poundage, at least at Gulf Wars. I got popped in the top of the head by a couple of arrows that sounded and felt just like sword blows.

I'm just glad they didn't hit any of my soft squishy parts...

My comment about drawing swords is a jest. If I let you get close enough to hit me then it's my fault for not keeping the distance and playing smart.

We could argue about where shots are allowed. We could argue how much force it takes to make an arrow shot a 'good' hit.

I am not disputting anyones points. So don't get your panties in a twist.

But think! Does any one really want a 1000 lbs crossbow firing a bolt at their face to consider it good? Is that they standard we want to shoot for? If so I will be happy to drop the cash to order one. I personaly wouldn't want some one head hunting me with a 1000 lbs crossbow. Do you?

The rules are in place to promote saftey. The nuclear arrow rule needs to be modified. But not to the point where it could harm some one or be totaly ineffective in a war senario. (I can imagine people rhinohiding an arrow shot)

Talan Gwyllt wrote:My comment about drawing swords is a jest. If I let you get close enough to hit me then it's my fault for not keeping the distance and playing smart.

We could argue about where shots are allowed. We could argue how much force it takes to make an arrow shot a 'good' hit.

I am not disputting anyones points. So don't get your panties in a twist.

But think! Does any one really want a 1000 lbs crossbow firing a bolt at their face to consider it good? Is that they standard we want to shoot for? If so I will be happy to drop the cash to order one. I personaly wouldn't want some one head hunting me with a 1000 lbs crossbow. Do you?

The rules are in place to promote saftey. The nuclear arrow rule needs to be modified. But not to the point where it could harm some one or be totaly ineffective in a war senario. (I can imagine people rhinohiding an arrow shot)

Have you EVER experienced a 1000 ip crossbow bolt? I have, and so has EVERY single person I've killed. My crossbow is just under 1000ip. And you know what? Not one single complaint! You guys who have only had nuclear arrows and light archers to deal with, I can understand your issues. But, come out to Estrella, we don't have your problems. I was given nothing but respect from both sides of the line. MOST of the fighters want to feel like they have been hit. I do. I've had people line up to get shot in the face, with a helm on of course, just to find out. Try it, you'll like it. Jeez all the whining about nuclear this and light that, CHANGE IT. Demand to your MIC's, KEM's to fix the problem. The reason we wear armor is to protect, and it does. It's proven at every event that allows CA, in its current state, in Atenveldt, Caid, and all other Estrella Kingdoms. I've never seen anyone being carried off the field by a bolt/arrow, I have seen them taken out because most other weapons on the field. I could NEVER dent a helm with my bow no matter how close, but how many times have you heard of someone denting a 16g helm with a sword???

Just some observations that might be pertinent to this discussion:

As far as calibration of arrows and bolts go, I've noticed that people are real funny about what they wanna get hit with. They dont wanna get hit by a crossbow hard enough to feel it, yet you can blast them with a saber and have them call it light. They complain abut the mace heads from by my hand mounted on a two foot stick of rattan, saying they need padding, yet you can take a 7 and a half foot long unpadded piece of rattan and hit them with it. Or a 6 foot long greatsword. Same thing really. Just odd and confusing shit.
Honest question here Bryce, not being a dick: What is the difference between a blow landing from a bolt that felt like a swordblow and a swordblow?
Same thing with face shots. I've been blasted in the face by spears used by talented spearmen that know how to drive through their thrusts like you should. At least a crossbow bolt or arrow bounces off as soon as it lands. None of the focus, ya know? Well, at least not as much as the focus anyway. I've said it before and I still maintain. An arrow should kill you if it hits your vitals. If it doesnt, then you'd survive that wound. None of this magic arrow crap. It should hit you hard enough to make you feel it and acknowledge it. And if one hits you, you should be on your honor TO acknowledge it. Just my opinion.

Animal wrote:Honest question here Bryce, not being a dick: What is the difference between a blow landing from a bolt that felt like a swordblow and a swordblow?

Honest answer, A, cause that's all I gots: Not a damn thing, accept that if it is from an arrow I don't have to take it to the top of the head, per the rules.

In that particular case, I was just surprised at how hard the things hit me. Wasn't bad, wasn't bitching, I was just like "Holy Shit!"

Madok ap Gruffydd wrote:Have you EVER experienced a 1000 ip crossbow bolt? I have, and so has EVERY single person I've killed. My crossbow is just under 1000ip. And you know what? Not one single complaint!

1000 lbs? No, just sounds scary. I am sure I will experience it one day. And like all others I won't complain either.