The Armour Archive

Greetings.

In a training other day, several times the players that used shields had its right arms (the arm that uses the sword). If this immobilizes the arm, it is not the same thing that death? After all, the players don't have time to change the hand sword. If it is valid, won't it motivate that everybody seeks the arm to disable the player?

Excuse for the beginner questions. But I don't have many references to remove doubt besides the manual of SCA.


Massaiti Takeda.

IN a tourney, the fighter is generally given the time to change weapons. This often happens in melee situations as well.

It is permissable to continue a combo after you have taken an opponent's arm. After that particular combo is over, most people stop attacking, and allow the fighter to change hands.

I am not sure it's required, though I don't believe I have ever seen it otherwise. After the fighter removes his hands from the basket hilts of his sword and sheild, It is against the rules to attack until he is fully armored again.

These are SCA rules and conventions. They don't apply if you are playing some other game.

f

In some areas it is also allowed to ask your opponent if you may continue using the sword arm but with the shield behind your back.

Generally, in a melee when there isn't time to switch, you wind up with a shieldman who can't strike back. But he can block for his buddies. Sometimes he is allowed by his opponents to put the shield behind him and fight with his sword hand.

In Historically-accurate western swordplay, the hands of your opponent are a much sought after target as they more often come into your range than other targets if you are maintaining proper distance.

In honorable (tournament) combat a fighter who has had his sword arm disabled will generally be allowed by his opponent to drop his shield and fight with sword in the shield hand. In any other form of combat the fighter who has lost his sword arm is stuck with only his shield until such time that he can safely drop it and pick up his sword with his shield hand unless his opponent allows the exchange.

In our fighter practices, not ritualized as some are, we generally accept that taking the sword arm is a kill. This is for convenience and lack of enough full gauntlets since some of us fight with quillion or tsuba on our swords. Had we enough gauntlets to go around we would allow switching the weapon to the other hand and dropping the shield.

In the end, it is how you wish to practice or play. Just remember that when you play in another's event you must follow their established rules.


Angus

This is for convenience and lack of enough full gauntlets since some of us fight with quillion or tsuba on our swords. Had we enough gauntlets to go around we would allow switching the weapon to the other hand and dropping the shield.

This is one of the reasons we've pretty much given up on half-guantlets over here in Avalon. It's just too dang inconvenient waiting for people to switch over or borrow a guantlet.

I like the "sword arm as a victory" idea. We'll give that a shot as one of the alternate rules.

Noe, It's great for an "informal" style of practice. Also, It helps you learn how to keep that arm from being a victim.


Angus

Thank you for the answers.

Well, I am me that am organizing the fights. Here it doesn't exist any kingdom of SCA or any other group of fights of swords. Therefore I try to create something based on it successes and my friends' mistakes.

Massaiti Takeda

Shane is right! Don't block with your hands!

The question concerned arms, not hands. Even a halfass fighter can use quillions with some effect to protect thier hands. And I, being a halfass fighter with quillions, should know. Basket hilts on long swords are like plastic armor. the artist formerly known as Flonzy can take it from there.

Massaiti-san (I hope this indicates the respect I intend), if there is not enough proper hand protection for all the fighters then to allow the taking of the sword arm to be a victory is entirely appropriate. Also, when enough hand protection is available the guideline can be changed. In fact, it can be changed anywhere in between when some have their own hand protection and others do not. Those who have their own hand protection may be allowed to switch hands for their weapons while those who don't may be compelled to concede defeat.

To be honest, I am inspired by your drive to create a medieval group of some sort where you are. I salute you in your efforts and hope you succeed greatly.

Yours in admiration,


Angus

I got smacked a LOT on my sword arm at Lilies (which was VERY fun), so I found myself being a sole-purpose shieldman for spearmen many times. I actually got a lot of thanks and praises from the knights and such I protected.

Well, I've been fighting for 4 years, and just recently learned how it works. It also comes with a fairly funny story.

I knew about the 1-on-1 rule, which is, if your sword arm is struck, ask your opponent if you may lose your shield and continue the bout. I assumed this was across the board an OK thing to do in the SCA.

We were doing melee practice, which is different. What gets hit is immobilized. If your sword arm is taken, you are a walking shield, until you are dead. I didn't know this - it had never come up.

And in a melee, my arm was taken. The person who did so was legged. He turned from me to seek other targets. And I promptly tucked my shield behind me, and bonked him on the head, to his immense puzzlement.

After a few hearty "Gee I'm sorrys", and a couple of laughs, all was well.

Then, the very next week, I'm at Baron Wars, and the exact same darn thing happens. But this time I did it right. I was pleased I had only goofed at practice.

The funny bit is the guy that I bonked on the head was right across the line from me, and watched the very same thing happen to me. He watched me take the arm shot, look at it, remember what to do, and then do the right thing. He said the look on my face was pretty priceless. We had another good laugh about it afterwards.