The Armour Archive

BdeB wrote::lol:





You guys are too, too much!

I'd never advocate striking a man after he has yielded! Please!

Since forcing an archer to yield is a 'death' for them that's all I'm talking about.

Get a grip and learn to take a joke people!!!



(BTW, getting "Rhysed" about made me fall out of my chair! )

IM bettin dollars to donuts SOMEONE will take it too far...


hence my challenge.

Bryce I know well enough of you that there is no malice of forthought in your challenge...

I also know average Joes who got a hard on for smashing lil archers I do believe some may find your challenge an excuse to breakout the A-hole ball and goto town....


that IS my entire point in my challenge if someone becomes an a-hole and uses your challenge as theyre excuse ......

meet Sir Bryce the year-and-aday archer

Sir Samuel,

Hopefully my clarification is to your satisfaction then.

There is always a level of idiotcy in what we do. God, we hit each other with Sticks!

Well, most of us do at least...

Regardless, as harsh as it sounds we all wear armour or some sort and we all sign waivers. I'm no more responsible for someone's possible injury because of something that I write on a website than any one else that isn't there.

If, God help you, any of you actually think that I am enticing some evil or foul thing write me privately.

If any of you want to hurt some poor archer or any one else on the field, then get the hell off the field, have a cold beer and pull your head out of your ass!


But as to the Ravine and Castle Battles at Gulf Wars, by all means bring the fight to the archers. Make them walk back and forth over and over. Don't stand to be shot at without at least offering some fight in return. Chase and harry them and do not let them pick you off from 20' behind your line. Return a level of fair play and fun to the game there. Tell me about it and i'll gift you with a small token.

Strike no one in anger. God, I can't believe I have to even say that.

Sir Samuel if there is some _real_ proof that I have injuried someone from my actions I will resign my spurs. I will not however do something base and call it chivalry.



This is why I shouldn't have given up booze for Lent right here! Makes you crazy I say, CRAZY!!!!

I admit that my sense of humour is warped and all that, but jees...

Vitus wrote:Samuel strives to be a Knight of the People. Question- what are the traps that come from trying to be such a knight? If a Knight is elevated, he is no longer of "the people."
Can an SCA knight *be* what a knight was, and still retain honor? Honor in the medieval sense? How can one seek after the esteem of the people and the Order, while not betraying either?
-V

thats your opinion and your well within your right with it... but to be perfectly frank Ive not given a damn what the order nor the people think in a great mess of my dealings... I follow my heart that lead me into this order and had lead me to many a good deed. My office and chain of state make me no greater than any man, my actions and beliefs Can. those that would follow me do so because they believe me worthy of following not because one man who had a good day in tourney decided I didnt suck and gave me rank.

If you see me as without honor for they way Ive chosen so be it. My oath didnt include making my fellow Knights like me...

I submit to you a belt, chain and spurs do not make one knightly, a love of kingdom and urge to ever do what is right in your heart does.

Nor do I believe a Knight of the Sca can ever become nor should they seek to become what a knight of the period was. we should not become the suppressors of men but the ones who inspire them to greater things. no man should find himself under the boot of another even if its got a spur upon it. period knights paid wages to theyre ratainers for service , we SCA knights must inspire and prove out worthyness for such honors.


we get what we give.....
and too many have died and served in honorable military action to insure all men are equal for me to not treat them as such. IF im given honor and elevated above other men it will be because they believe in me not because my peers do. in this day and age we earn respect and valor we cannot assume its ours because a sword touched us three times.


perhaps it would suit you if I returned those trappings of office, and perhaps someday Ill find my ideal to be contrary to the order and do so. currently I think im following along right nice with those before me in the sca lineage and doing what I can. I see men like, Duke Rangvaldr, Duke Cuan,Duke Alaric, Sir Forgal, Duke Edmond,Duke Paul, Duke Eliahu, who by theyre grace and fairness have earned honor and are reviered throughout the lands as good and noble. they didnt become honored above others by stepping on them but by bringing them up with them. If that is not a list of Knights for the people I know not what is.

BdeB wrote:Sir Samuel,

Hopefully my clarification is to your satisfaction then.

There is always a level of idiotcy in what we do. God, we hit each other with Sticks!

Well, most of us do at least...

Regardless, as harsh as it sounds we all wear armour or some sort and we all sign waivers. I'm no more responsible for someone's possible injury because of something that I write on a website than any one else that isn't there.

If, God help you, any of you actually think that I am enticing some evil or foul thing write me privately.

If any of you want to hurt some poor archer or any one else on the field, then get the hell off the field, have a cold beer and pull your head out of your ass!


But as to the Ravine and Castle Battles at Gulf Wars, by all means bring the fight to the archers. Make them walk back and forth over and over. Don't stand to be shot at without at least offering some fight in return. Chase and harry them and do not let them pick you off from 20' behind your line. Return a level of fair play and fun to the game there. Tell me about it and i'll gift you with a small token.

Strike no one in anger. God, I can't believe I have to even say that.

Sir Samuel if there is some _real_ proof that I have injuried someone from my actions I will resign my spurs. I will not however do something base and call it chivalry.



This is why I shouldn't have given up booze for Lent right here! Makes you crazy I say, CRAZY!!!!

I admit that my sense of humour is warped and all that, but jees...

the thing is Ive heard fools use excuses before when doing something they know to be wrong, and I know nothing of you but valiance and honor and would be hurt to see your name used by such a fool. my challenge is more a warning that your name may be used in vain by someone who made a mistake and seeks to move the responsibility to you instead of paying they price they owe.

All knights of all periods have wrestled with the idea of oppressor -vs- vindicator. Samuel, your actions and beliefs are the reason that you have the signs of your office.
Not giving a damn about what the Order or the People think? From where does your honor come?

Si Vitus --
I would think Samuel meant that he doesn't let popular opinion dictate his actions.

Sir Samuel --
I think it is silly to challenge Sir Bryce for potential misdeeds of people who do not follow rules and try to hide behind his back. You know that's not what he said, he has posted here that that is not what he wants, so instead, you should break these feeble defences and deflections they put up and punish the miscreants who did a fowl deed, not a Knight who made a worthy challenge.

Vitus wrote:All knights of all periods have wrestled with the idea of oppressor -vs- vindicator. Samuel, your actions and beliefs are the reason that you have the signs of your office.
Not giving a damn about what the Order or the People think? From where does your honor come?

what I do isnt determined by the opinions of the order or the people I follow my heart in actions and deeds. thats my meaning in not giving a damn.

how would I be my own man If I would be swayed by the thoughts and desires of others? I can take advice and good counsel and decide upon my course of action from there but to be diswayed from action because it may not meet the approval of one or the other would be counter to who I am and my belief of what Knighthood is. are we not all individual and given a place of command and honor because we can be trusted to follow the path that is right in our own minds?
to me it is our own idividuality that we bring to the order and create something good and right. we share a sense of justice and a core of belief in what is right and true but it is our own way in brinigng that forward that makes our order all the more.
take for example your tombs of knowledge that you have issued forth, not every of the order would share the same line by line view but your efforts have brought education to many and that is worthy of renown. and furthers the order.


One of my favorite excerpt is from de charny.
"31 And there are some whom everyone should consider to be wise. It is those who, from their youth, strive diligently to learn what is best to do, to distinguish good from evil, and to know what is reasonable to do; and because they recignize what course of action would be against reason, they endevor to behave loyally, confidently, and according to what is right. And in their dealings with others, such people do not seek to take away the rights of others, but want above all to protect such rights for them and thier honor as well. And in addition, these people know well how to advise others honestly and wisely, without any evil malice, not using excessive subtlety, and without incurring shameful reproach. these should be held to be truely wise, and such power of reasoning is good if it is always put to good use."


I see us both seeking this wisdom and the pursuit is true to our hearts but doesnt always share the same path.

you and I differ greatly on our view of deeds of arms. for example. I see deeds of arms not to be saught for but found to be done. aka enter into arms not seeking what renown you can aquire in the day but enter into arms for the excercise that comes from noble passages. If fate finds you have done more and are more worthy then you have achieved without the vainglory of pursuit. in war the greatness is for the mass not for the one. should you find yourself fighting upon a bridge as the last standing against the foe and you vanquish many before your fall then renown is thusly earned but If you are to step forth and offer combat to one while your host stands idley by in waiting for your deed to finish and the foe has cleared another bridge and is attacking you from the flank your singular pursuit has now endangered the battle becuase your moment in the sun slowed the pace and fury of the combat. thusly the pursuit of renown has now become the cost of the battle...

Is it not a greater deed to see your comrades in arms safely through a battle defeating your foe soundly by the combined might you share? or is there more renown to be born by facing a noble opponant one at a time and making your brethren spectators to your deed by forcing theyre battle to stop as you have taken the focal point of the battle for your exploit? would it be more worthy to block a blow from spear what would have smote your comrade soundly or to lunge forth and kill him that has killed your comrade? the choice between blocking the blow or sacrificeing your comrade and killing his attacker.

Im of the mind, pursuiting renown through deeds of arms has its place upon the tourney field and can be FOUND upon the war field through fate awarding you the situation ... not through seeking and creating it youself.


from a tactical standpoint alone Good Sir Bryces challenge I would not want upon my Squires in war. because it may inspire some to break ranks and seek thusly his prize over following the logic of battle and remaining in formation. should it happen that they could achieve by fate the completion of his challenge then the greater good is served.

Dmitriy wrote:Si Vitus --
I would think Samuel meant that he doesn't let popular opinion dictate his actions.

Sir Samuel --
I think it is silly to challenge Sir Bryce for potential misdeeds of people who do not follow rules and try to hide behind his back. You know that's not what he said, he has posted here that that is not what he wants, so instead, you should break these feeble defences and deflections they put up and punish the miscreants who did a fowl deed, not a Knight who made a worthy challenge.

the effort isnt to force sir Bryces hand at anything but to point out the can of worms that he may open in such a challenge.
combat archery at gulf wars has long become a sore spot for many. giving any excuse , however feeble, for misuse of your foe by those who would be so base can possibly lead to injury. that is my point in its entirty. and because I honor and respect Sir Bryce I chose to bring that to his attention in challenge. Sad as it may be that his good hearted challenge meant in fun could verily be used as an excuse for "payback" by some.

I don't advocate hurting anyone on purpose, not even archers. One thing that confuses me. Many people on this thread and others, approve the hiring of mercs. Once you hire mercs, you tend to say to them "I am paying you in this battle to go kill off unit X".

What is the difference between paying mercs to kill off archers, pikeman, the reserves, attack a shield wall and...

Versus

Offering tokens of appreciation to anyone that kills off archers, pikeman, the reserves, attack a shield wall and....

To me the second is actually better, not worse. It seems quite medieval, just as authentic as hiring a merc.

If some idiot intentionally hurts an archer, he should be kicked out of the SCA. That I agree with.

Richard Blackmoore
East Kingdom

I am humbled to be included in the company you name, Samuel. I have read this thread with interest and I think a lot of important issues are involved. First, is Bryce responsible for the unintended consequences of his post. This issue alone requires analysis of many factors. Bryce is a knight of the SCA and I know that for him that is as real as any other part of his life -meaning he, like me and many others, believes that you are always a knight or you are never a knight. Knighthood is not a garment that you take off when the weekend or the war ends. Because he is a knight of the SCA, and generally well regarded, people who read his posts and hear his words will tend to give them weight. Some portion of those who heed Bryce's words will twist them or use them to justify their own purposes. A knight should therefore, always be aware of the effect of his words, the range of his broadcast, and the unintended but forseeable consequences of a suggestion made in jest. This does not mean that Bryce is legally responsible if some thug goes after the archers at Gulf Wars with the intent to do harm and then tries to claim this bounty as an excuse (we could debate the limits of protected free speech versus incitement, hate speech, prior restraints, etc.- but let's not), but I know Bryce, and if some lackwit mows down a group of archers as they try to yield and then tries to shelter behind Bryce's bounty, he will feel morally responsible. That being said, we also have to look at the context in which Bryce made his "offer". Through the use of the internet, Bryce could potentially reach everyone who plays our game -including those just getting started who don't have a clue how things are really done. In addition, the word "bounty", when used to describe a tangible reward for taking out a person or group on the field has long had a nasty connotation in the SCA. Personally, while I might have posted such a jest to a small group like those interested in authenticity or the kingdom knight's list (where I know none of my brothers is ignorant enough to injure an archer in pursuit of this prize), I have seen enough of the internet to know that even with emoticons, it is a poor medium for comunicating tone, subtlety, or irony. I think it was a mistake for Bryce to post his bounty message and I am sure that he does too.

As for Samuel's post, I read it not as an actual challenge to Bryce, but rather as a wakeup call delivered the idiom Bryce used. And I understand Samuel's strong argument that a knight, charged to be a protector of the people, is necessarily therefore of the people. I agree with his assessment, and thank him for it, that I and many other knights try to bring folks up with me. But for me to try to do that seems to argue that the "people" aren't where I am yet. Does that make sense? I think Vitus has it nailed when he says it is the struggle in the knight between oppressor and vindicator. We belong to an elite; the requirements for entry are demanding and we are self selecting (I know the Crown has the last word, but few knights are made against the will of the Order). As members of the Chivalry, we are called upon to be better. In the current middle ages, I believe that requires us to be more puissant, but also more caring and more responsible for the folks that our medieval counterparts would have stepped on. It is natural to want to be a man of the people, but the people is a broad category that contains some elements I would rather not be part of. I would prefer to be a man of the Kingdom, the Society, and the laws and customs that codify the ideals that make what we do so much more than a game. To do that, one must stand a little apart; because popular acclaim has little to do with what is right, and the majority is very often wrong.

This turned into something I had not intended, but it boils down to this: knights should tread carefully on this very large stage. As an aside, I would not want to be your average medieval knight either. In fact, I would only be willing to trade places with one knight in particular - but I won't tell you who it is.

Pax

Cuan

Samuel, Cuan- impressive writing. Fine chivalric science.

Sir Samuel,Duke Cuan.

Very well put.

The crowns in the SCA only rule because we believe.
An SCA knights only power is the faith we put in them.

At the end of the day neither will get you a big mac any cheaper .

It is your words and actions that make me and others want to be like you one day.
I may never be a knight, all I want is to be a good person thats enough for me.
You're both inspiring Thank you

Thorstenn Inn Rangi-hendi (the Wronghand)

After reading Cuan's post, all I can hear in my head is "Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?". Beckett revisited.

I did not think about the word 'bounty', I was thinking Bryce was simply rewarding those that would seek to protect men of coat armour from those that would attack us from a distance, without putting themselves in the crucible. For that I thank him. Perhaps bounty was not the best word choice.

But I firmly believe that if anyone is stupid enough to misinterpret Bryce's words or use them as an excuse to do something dumb/wrong/dangerous, that they were bound to do so eventually and Bryce would not be at fault.

Now if he was drinking with a bunch of mercs and Tuchux and said quite seriously "Will no one rid me of these troublesome archers"? Bryce might end up facing a good old fashioned scourging...

Richard are you somehow implying that Tuchux would go out and injure or somehow dishonor these archers because Bryce offered some sort of bounty?

Bryce de Byram is a man of honor and integrity. He would NEVER encourage dishonorable behaviour nor would he propose that archers, or anyone else for that matter, be struck outside the bonds of our rules system. He is a strict adherant to the Laws of War and is a true and steady influence in Atlantia.
Others have chosen to make a mountain out of a molehill here. While a knight needs must have a care with his words, others must exercise similar judgement regarding the use of them. Just because it comes out of a knight's mouth is no excuse for doing something stupid. Ignorance is bliss, but it won't stand up in court.
Sir Bryce
was attempting to: A) Bring the level of play up, by making the archers work harder to stay alive. B) Attempting to express a medieval knight's
very real and historical distaste for archers but with humor and sarcasm rather than malice and spite.
And C) Making an effort to reward battlefield valor with a token of his appreciation. This is not a bounty...it's a token of respect for those who would take the risk and gain the glory. The two things are VERY different.
Anyone who would impugn Sir Bryce further should consider the purity of his motives rather than the "correctness" of his words. Anyone who would insult him...may meet me upon any field on which I stand and I will prove their fault upon their bodies.

Baron Hamish MacLeod

Gentlemen and Ladies...
take a deep breath...
I do not know Bryce but his renown is not unknown to me and from that I would know him to be a good man and a man of honor. What I read in his post (and I replied in kind) was good natured smack talk. Basically he said "Hey guys, I can't go to the war, get some for me and tell me a good story about it over a beer, my treat!

that's it.

sometimes a cigar IS a cigar.

" Remember, guys- don't kill the archers on YOUR side, regardless of how fun and satisfying that would be. You will get in big trouble."


About every 3 months or so I think of Rhys and raise a pint in his honor for his actions on the field that day.

I need to start doing that more often.

When y'all are standing around in the fort at GW for 45 minutes, getting shot at by people you can't see, and can't see you, (and it being considered honorable combat ) you'll know why I'll never attend that event ever again.


VvS

People,
It's just a game. ( a stupid game, look at the way wer'e dressed)
Also, almost no one is really trying to hurt anyone, and even if there are the occasional yahoos, everyone wears armour.
I am going to put a bounty on the heads of people with no sense of humour. Will no one rid me of these troublesome knights?

Nissan Maxima wrote:People,
It's just a game. ( a stupid game, look at the way wer'e dressed)
Also, almost no one is really trying to hurt anyone, and even if there are the occasional yahoos, everyone wears armour.
I am going to put a bounty on the heads of people with no sense of humour. Will no one rid me of these troublesome knights?

I say unto you today that if anyone hunts a knight for combat, that I shall have to challenge you to a fight, or something.

Odo

ps> of course this is said in jest. The whole thread, while having some merit in the discussion of the Order of Chivalry in the SCA, is actually kind of silly. There were so many replies that I held back on, and thankfully so.

Greetings!

I know Sir Bryce as well, actually I believe I authorized him in combat archery over a decade ago.. I have no doubt that his intentions were honorable and that it was intended as good natured "smack" talk.

However, I know all too well unfortunately, that there are areas where archers are not liked and some fighters are taught to try and hurt the archer and/or to intentionally try and break their equipment (often their crossbow, while the archer is holding it). Yes, I know multiple instances of this and yes the fighter involved admitted that was how they were taught, several were taught by their knight to try and break the bow/crossbow intentionally.

We have discussed that before, on this forum. I believe that is getting better and as archers become more part of the unit and army (which includes getting our share of "smack" talk), I believe it will become less and less of an issue. Actually, now I believe the majority of the fighters and marshals would come down hard on any who did intentionally seek to injure or strike an already yielded archer or attempt to break their equipment.

I have met Sir Samuel as well, I believe his intention was well thought out and he had good cause for his words. Actually, I would like to thank him for his words of caution.. since some people do get carried away.. and I believe his post and the following ones should damper anyone's over-enthusiastic response to Sir Bryce's "quest".

IMO, if Sir Bryce added a short line or tag line, reminding people that a yielded archer was a dead archer or something along those lines, I think that would suffice.

If any archer (or any other fighter) was intentionally hit after they yielded, I believe that fighter that hit them should be the one dealt with swiftly and strictly. I have complete confidience in Sir Artos and the other marshals at Gulf Wars, that I'm certain they would handle that situation very well.

Unfortunately, Sir Samuel and Duke Cuan's concern is well justified. Sir Bryce's intention was good and IMO.. fun, good natured "quests" and "smack" talk are a core part of being part of the army.. i.e. one of the fighters. My recommendation, just add a quick line reminding people to act with honor in how they kill the archers and it should be ok. Hopefully, in the future that added step won't be neccessary.

I've heard that Sir Bryce is going to Blackstone Raids, which is great. I'm certain if I asked him, he would be willing to help guard me on the field, even though I will be using my bow in the battles. Luckily (grin) we will be on the same side, so we won't have to kill each other.

I love killing my friends when they are on the other side. I know they enjoy killing me, although I don't enjoy that part as much, LOL. Good natured bounties or prizes for killing x.. can be great fun. One of my fondest memories is when a Trimarian King put a bounty on my head (started as a 6 pack and at his Queen's words, a 12 pack of beer) for whomever killed me, everytime I was killed, at that Sea Wars. He even took my helm and showed it to everyone, so they would know who to kill.
I'll admit that annoyed me.. well at least until I realized the next battle was a woods battle (resurrection). Want to guess how many times I was killed, whenever I was near resurrection point?? ROFL... I don't want to know how much he ended up paying.

Good natured prizes/bounties can be great fun. I'm hoping to do one for Pennsic. I would like to see how many archers we can get to show up for one specific battle. Either that battle or a different one, I believe I can get most if not all of the archers, at least for the beginning of the battle.. to do volley fires. I know everyone wants to see one at Pennsic. If we have the numbers, without limiting the number of missiles on the field, especially if it's done at the beginning of the battle, we can do that. Once the lines have met, it's really not worthwhile, IMO to continue volley fire.. unless it's a bridge type battle where we have more than 3 ranks deep.. so we can shoot into that rank or deeper. It's also not as effective as it should be.. since the top and the sides of the helm are likely to be "proof" at Pennsic.. But, it's different and IMO, Awesome to see.. and I think it would add a "cool" factor to the beginning of the battle.

I just need to see if I can find someone to make the pewter tokens that I would like to give out.. if I can, I'll post my quest.

I'm sorry this is so long-winded. Sir Bryce, I'm looking forward to seeing you at Blackstone.

Tessa, Princess of AEthelmearc

Good googly moogly! It was a joke!

If I was serious I would have written the Ansterroan archers and begged them to put down their longbows and outdated golf tube arrows and join the arms race of the Trimarians, with their Crossbows, Baldar blunts and wooden arrows, and shieldmen with huge freaking pavises. (The worse comment I read was from the Ansterroan who vowed to 'shoot 25 knights'. That right there would be a perfect example of why Trimaris dominates CA at Gulf Wars. Because they train their army to shoot SMART.)

Then I would tell them the advice I give every archer that asks me.
1. Take out the other side’s archers first.
2. Take out Commanders, spearman and polearms next.

It's 2. that leads to the problem, IMO, that knights feel hunted. We are more likely to be carrying advanced weapons forms or be commanders and therefore more likely to become targets.

The Ravine Battle was a joke last year and the fighting was well, sorta boring, at least for me. The running was fabulous, however! I had many, many fine conversations with Sir's Balin and Steffan and we ran back and forth from resurrection point, only to be shot 20' behind our lines and have to return.

A good friend of mine would council me that "Words create the climate". In that vein let me say again. I didn't mean "bounty" like mercenary pay, but rather as a small gift. In my attempt to pretty up the language I lost a good chunk of you.

God save you if you try to harm anyone and use my name as a defense. I'll find you and I’ll have satisfaction.

I'll also edit the post per my good friend, Her Highness Aethelmarc for any Waterheads out there that can't infer reason and meaning into my words.

As I have offended, I will make amends.

Byram

I train my archers not to shoot the other sides commanders if they seem stupid. Generally in the SCA the greatest hazard to an army seems to be its own command structure. Let the Commanders live, they will most likely drive their army over a cliff or into their own troops.

And Sir Bryce, oops, you should know that nothing is punished as surely as levity in authority.

Yeah Nissian, Sometimes the best thing you can do is leave a commander in charge...

A good friend reminded me of one of my mottos today:

"You can't fix Stupid!"

Speaking as a Trimarian who has been known to carry a bow, though not for some time now, It isn't a matter of targeting Knights or the comanders or anyone else who feels like they are being "hunted". We teach our archers to make every shot count.... you can't shoot through a shield... don't waste the arrow. If the same spearman walks throught the same field of fire 5 times. chances are, if he doesnt have a shield to protect him, he's gonna get shot (at) 5 times. nothing personal,really.

we use interlocking fields of fire
we use targeting teams to work the angles to create openings
we use spotters to call our targets for us

really, it's simple stuff.

And they do thier jobs extremely well.

a glimpse of BdB's future: Safe for work!

Bwahaha! I love Strong Bad!

Animal Weretiger wrote:Richard are you somehow implying that Tuchux would go out and injure or somehow dishonor these archers because Bryce offered some sort of bounty?

NOOOO! Sorry if it came out that way. I meant it as a joke, as in Bryce pulling a Beckett. As in if he actually intended to create trouble through carelessness, then he would end up having to order his own scourging as penance (watch that cool movie about Beckett, A Man For All Seasons I think it was, the king just ended up with more problems not less when his knights acted on his poorly chosen words said in frustration and anger).

I probably should have put smilies in or just not written it in the first place. My apologies.

tessathehuntress wrote:Greetings!
However, I know all too well unfortunately, that there are areas where archers are not liked and some fighters are taught to try and hurt the archer and/or to intentionally try and break their equipment (often their crossbow, while the archer is holding it). Yes, I know multiple instances of this and yes the fighter involved admitted that was how they were taught, several were taught by their knight to try and break the bow/crossbow intentionally.

Tessa, Princess of AEthelmearc

I find this more upsetting than you can imagine. And you are not the first archer to say this to me or allude to it. But names are never given to me when I ask for details.

Anyone teaching or engaging in attempts to injure others on purpose are committing criminal assault if not conspiracy. Purposely breaking other people's equipment is also reprehensible. These idiots should be at a minimum reported so that they can be monitored, if not subjected to censure or explusion from the SCA.

But as I said, no names or instances that are verifiable and recent are never provided to me.

This is such a serious matter, that since I do not doubt YOUR word Tessa, that I would request that you either identify the alledged perpetrators so that they can be reported to the appropriate Kingdom EM or deputy EM and/or the SEM as appropriate. I would question why these people were not dealt with by the Marshal in charge of the event where such BLATANTLY ILLEGAL activities were occuring.

Frankly, this brings such dishonour upon the order of chivalry, that I would expect that the matter receive public acknowledgement so that those knights not involved with the criminal actions of others will not be assumed to be involved.

Would you please be so kind as to keep me personally informed of how the SCA responds to your reports? For I will make it my mission in life to be sure that this information is made available to the known world chivalry and to personally write the the SEM and board if your allegations are not acted upon in a prompt and responsive manner.

If however such allegations are proved false, I would humbly request that you post that as well.

There are idiots in every SCA order. But I would not have the actions and honour of the chivalry at large brought low by a few miscreants. The chivalry as a whole does not condone such actions, regardless of whether the victim was an archer, heavy weopons fighter or other participant.

Sincerely,

Richard Blackmoore
East Kingdom, KSCA

P.S. If these allegations are true, you have my apologies and assurance that I will not condone or cover up any actions of this kind. I do however hope that such allegations are both unfounded and inaccurate.

No worries Richard. I figured I'd ascertain your meaning before I took you the wrong way. No apologies required.

Sir Bryce, "If I was serious I would have written the Ansterroan archers and begged them to put down their longbows and outdated golf tube arrows" Golf tube arrows???? Mayhap you are thinking of the Calontiri.

I am one of those archers that you have placed said bounty on and did and still do not find offence in your words. One would think that anyone with all their mental capabilities intact would have noticed that your words were said with humour in them. No malice was seen here. A good natured jibe intended and taken. I for one have no problems taking a good shot as any who take the field should. It is part of the game we all play. My love of archery led me to Combat archery in the SCA, which has led to a new love the last couple of years. Chivalric fighting has become that new love. I intend to take the field in whatever fashion my King and General require of me. If that means using a bow so be it, if it means taking up sword and shield then so be it. I will be arrayed to do whichever is required. Saying that I look forward to seeing all my old friends and hopefully making some new ones next week. For those who can not be there be sure that we will raise a drink and toast to your health and wish that you were there.

Hear hear, well said Ieanmor!

iaenmor wrote: Chivalric fighting has become that new love. I intend to take the field in whatever fashion my King and General require of me. If that means using a bow so be it, if it means taking up sword and shield then so be it. I will be arrayed to do whichever is required. Saying that I look forward to seeing all my old friends and hopefully making some new ones next week. For those who can not be there be sure that we will raise a drink and toast to your health and wish that you were there.

God Save and Bless you!

You must be a distant relation of mine.
BdeB (Duane Moore)

Holy Frijoles B!

See, you need to practice the secrets of Qui Chang Kane, and just catch the damn arrows. And them use them to stab a fool in the eye like Legolas.

No fuss, no muss.

And ya look cool doing it.

Balynar

P.s.- stop with the damn smiley explosions! Your posts are starting to look like the hamster dance!