The Armour Archive

I'll thow this out there

Little stabs, even big punctuers with sharp blades, are usually not even felt by people in a fight.

I've been stabbed pretty good a few times, most of the time i didn't know it till the fight over and i was bleeding.

I've broken up knife fights where guys were cut/ stabbed _bad_ even fatally and still going all out till one passed out from blood loss.

In my experiece most of the "stabs" we deliver in the SCA with daggers esp, but swords too would _not_ stop a man until much much later. Well maybe the face depending on where you hit em. Like Aaron said it would take alot to bring an armoured man down.

It takes alot to bring an angry/ motivated unarmoured man down.

Unless it hit a major muscle group, motor center, joint or something, pops like we hit eachother with don't seem to stop people, they bleed alot but they don't stop. You'd have to dang near impale people, set the point and ram it through them. I think Lichtehauer calls it "wound to the hilt"

Now you break a bone, espically a load bearing one? That puts most people down. You shear a major mucle group, espically in the legs, that puts people down. Probly why the poll axe was so popular.

I like my friends, and our mutual ability to continue liking one another. Combat in earnest would not permit that.

This is perhaps true for you. However, I find it not.

This is why armor doesn't mean as much as the mindset to fight in such deeds as the COTT, As Real Men Fought, and other deeds that are far more than modern fencing with a helm and stick.

If you can't wrap the idea of it, you do not understand the real culture of arms. Most of my best freinds are gained through the culture of deeds, and the fact that they have at one time tried to beat me into oblivion.

Leo, help me to understand where you are coming from.
In the system you are discussing, if the potential for injury an accepted risk or the desired outcome?
I can and do trade hard blows with my friends and family knowing full well that one of us may get hurt as a result and we accept that; in fact we embrace it as part of why we do it. To know and trust your kin with your life and wellbeing in sport gives a sense of freedom of action that defies description. But to seek to do bodily harm and still call them friend… I don’t get it…

It is kind of funny to have SCA marshals stop us (happened twice) because they thought we were mad at each other and fighting for real when in fact we were just going at it hammer and tongs and having a hard time.

I find nothing unsafe or unfriendly about the 30, in fact its where I feel the greatest sense of camaraderie.
For the most part its an exercise in counted blows and thrust specific targeting for areas that take into account the armour as worn.
A little mod to engagement as well.
There is a common bond in a way and a certain amount of trust needed.
The quality of the individuals keeps jackassery to a minimum, and offenders can be filtered out.

Leo Medii wrote:

I like my friends, and our mutual ability to continue liking one another. Combat in earnest would not permit that.

This is perhaps true for you. However, I find it not.

This is why armor doesn't mean as much as the mindset to fight in such deeds as the COTT, As Real Men Fought, and other deeds that are far more than modern fencing with a helm and stick.

If you can't wrap the idea of it, you do not understand the real culture of arms. Most of my best freinds are gained through the culture of deeds, and the fact that they have at one time tried to beat me into oblivion.

Leo, you misunderstand my distinction between combat and a game.

You're still talking about playing.

Combat in earnest is not a game. It isn't something that happens among people who are friends. Consider that a definition of the term.

Understand the real culture of arms ? As a person who has not seen active combat, not killed another man, not witnessed friends dying and all the rest of those things that go with being in real combat, no, I don't understand the real culture of arms. Honestly, I don't want to. Understanding that requires being there and I truly do not wish such experiences.

I get it about playing hard - it's pretty much the only way I know how to play. But playing hard is not fighting in earnest.

And that distinction is one that I am not willing to abandon. I don't intentionally maim my friends. I play a hard game with them, and we accept the risks in it. That's just not the same thing as fighting for real, wherein maiming the other guy such that he can't hurt me is an immediate and top priority. I won't go there unless some godamn idiot forces me to ...

Ceddie, I think you answered your own question.

And, I couldn't have said it better Master Magnus.


I live in a different world than most people. I am a member of the SCA, but that is my "hobby". Once, Sir Vitus said I was the "real deal" and didn't know what he meant. Now, I think I do. I know exaclty why, how and what these men thought and felt in a way. How you can have sat in a dinner and shared wine with a man whom earlier in the day was attempting to beat you into the ground in a tournement.

I then began to attend an event called the Saline Celtic Festival where we did an "as armored" demo. It was a godsend, and was what I wish the COTT would become. My second COTT I began to truly understand how these men felt and what they carried inside. How these men who traveled in tourney and war could have such comraderie and freindship with each other. The trust in these contests is what makes them so dear. The fact that injury is forgiven at an instant when off the field is amazing. When on the field the intent to win is there, the chance of injury is there, but after that, there is no malice, no hate, no anger.

Nothing can match those men, and the love and trust that is built in those deeds.

But playing hard is not fighting in earnest.

Ah ha! This is our misunderstanding. I think you can fight in earnest WITHOUT maiming your opponent. You can fight hard, as they did, without wanting to kill the man. They did this many times, and although risk of injury is there, killing your opponent was not the goal in most tournaments. It happened, but it was not the intent (I believe).

And, I would say 99.99999% of regular SCA fighter folk don't WANT that experience, and I think they could not maintain the mindset for it.

Some want that experience. That "almost there" level of combat. Some don't. Some couldn't. To each their own!

check.

And, I would say 99.99999% of regular SCA fighter folk don't WANT that experience, and I think they could not maintain the mindset for it.

You are correct. And I think that they would be horrified if it were thrust upon them.

Leo Medii wrote:Ceddie, I think you answered your own question.

And, I couldn't have said it better Master Magnus.


I live in a different world than most people. I am a member of the SCA, but that is my "hobby". Once, Sir Vitus said I was the "real deal" and didn't know what he meant. Now, I think I do. I know exaclty why, how and what these men thought and felt in a way. How you can have sat in a dinner and shared wine with a man whom earlier in the day was attempting to beat you into the ground in a tournement.

I then began to attend an event called the Saline Celtic Festival where we did an "as armored" demo. It was a godsend, and was what I wish the COTT would become. My second COTT I began to truly understand how these men felt and what they carried inside. How these men who traveled in tourney and war could have such comraderie and freindship with each other. The trust in these contests is what makes them so dear. The fact that injury is forgiven at an instant when off the field is amazing. When on the field the intent to win is there, the chance of injury is there, but after that, there is no malice, no hate, no anger.

Nothing can match those men, and the love and trust that is built in those deeds.

hmm. This piece I "got" from the first time I put on harness (for what it was) and traded blows. It's why I'm still around. Never needed a special venue for it. And granted, it isn't always there, every time out with every opponent. I'm not always there and the opponent isn't always one who can push me to the limits that get us into that special place. But it's never been about the venue - it's always been about the contest.

So I guess part of what I'm *not* getting here, is that you guys aren't finding this in "regular" SCA fighting.

So I guess part of what I'm *not* getting here, is that you guys aren't finding this in "regular" SCA fighting.

I will have to take the 5th on that one. Even for me, there is a time when descretion is the better part of one's opinion.

Nobody alive knows more about the medieval "culture of arms" than Steve Muhlberger. Not the middle ages, not the 14th century- the culture of arms. It is a specific area of study almost unheard of- hell, he may have invented it.
Will McLean also knows an insane amount about this specific area of study, as does Hugh Knight, Brian Price and a few other guys. Richard Kaeuper's work hovers near this area of study. Constance Brittain Bouchard and Peter Coss know alot about this stuff too.

Techniques and intentions are what decide whether fighting is for fun or not. Some medieval warriors were crazy (John Holland for example) and some were not. Medieval nobles were quick to fight, and quick to weep over a sad turn of events. They could kill you with one hand and blow their noses from grief with the other.

Gavin, one thing I have learned is that guys who are just *okay* at regular SCA sword and shield don't need superhuman handspeed to excel in the Thirty. Also, wearing real armour isn't a hindrance because nobody is half-naked. One of my brother knights asked what was under my Ledner and when I answered I felt so dirty...I felt like a cheat.

WHAT I WANT NOW ARE MORE SCENARIOS BASED UPON THE THIRTY SUBCULTURE

Real Pas...eight tenans versus thirty or more comers.
Barriers
Sword and shield with small guige shields and crossguards only.
Foot tilting (I ain't doing this, but I would love to watch it...Darwinism in action.)

WHAT I WANT NOW ARE MORE SCENARIOS BASED UPON THE THIRTY SUBCULTURE

You can say that again.

And again too.

A few more times as well.

I would choose them over any other contest now.

Leo Medii wrote:

So I guess part of what I'm *not* getting here, is that you guys aren't finding this in "regular" SCA fighting.

I will have to take the 5th on that one. Even for me, there is a time when descretion is the better part of one's opinion.

I’ll go there.
Whiners. They take any chance they can to tear down something as simple as our game.
Cheaters. The need to win at any cost… even honor… cheapens that same game to a point where none of us can pay it.
Rules lawyers. They must ruin each and every fight by dragging it out way past where is should have gone by attempting to litigate a victory.
Nanny-marshals. They just have to save us from ourselves because someone might not have a good time if they get a boo-boo in our contact sport.

This 05% of the population sucks the fun out of 90% of the game.

That is some of what is not in the Culture of arms that makes it different from typical SCA fighting. The rest of what makes it appealing, you'll have to find that on your own.

The rest of what makes it appealing, you'll have to find that on your own.

And it is an interesting journey! The discovery is an incredible moment....

Vitus von Atzinger wrote:WHAT I WANT NOW ARE MORE SCENARIOS BASED UPON THE THIRTY SUBCULTURE

This is where you kind of lose me. What I always wanted was a hard fought contest, a challenge that tested my skill, my strength, even my nerve - but never got mean. The dressing around it doesn't matter nearly so much as the contest between the combattants.

My armour, your armour, the other guy's armour - it let's us play harder without hurting each other as much. If it looks nice too, that's great, but it's not a necessary feature to the contest being a great contest. Your armour heavier, lighter, more or less encumbering than mine - I don't care, it's just part of what comes to the table. I'm taller than you are - it matters in how we fight one another, but it doesn't matter to the fight.

There is definitely a 14th c. mafia subculture in the SCA, with a powerful aesthetic and a strong voice, pushing its particular era forward. That has ups and downs. When it runs over other people's interest in their particular era, that's not so good. When it raises the bar for everyone's efforts to represent their era, that is good.

My point is, it doesn't take a CotT to get a sense of what it was to fight hard against people who were only your 'enemies' out there on the field.

In a sense, you're pushing to remove the kind of fighting you want from the normal SCA context. I see that as just plain being a mistake. I think it's counter-productive for what I believe you want to accomplish and I'm sure it's counter-productive to the SCA list field as a whole.

In a sense, you're pushing to remove the kind of fighting you want from the normal SCA context. I see that as just plain being a mistake. I think it's counter-productive for what I believe you want to accomplish and I'm sure it's counter-productive to the SCA list field as a whole.

Could you elaborate on this? I am certain I am not understanding your intent in it.

I dont see how the 14th cent culture is stepping on any toes or is infringing on anyones good time or running over someone elses intrests.
If its not for you well you avoid it.
I avoid ninja and piarate culture, its not of intrest to me at all but I dont feel its stepping on my toes or running over my intrests.
I guess I dont understand where you are comming from.
I enjoy seeing a cohesive look every now and then.
I am a pretty visual guy, looking athte field and seeing everyone armed correctly for a specific period of time, and then modifying the targetting and blow counting to better address what it is to fight in that type of gear, I just dont see how anyone could look at it with negativity.
If you dont like it you dont do it. It has no effect on you.
The fighting is intense, but so was the front line of last years hardrians wall battle, that was some press, I loved that as well, but it did not transport me back in time as well as the 30.
In the 30 a magic crossbow bolt that kills all it touches does not enter the picture, I think thats a nice break, and I am a proponent of Combat Archery.

I don't think that shields need to be destructible for the CoT. It has been my thought for a long time, that one well made shield would last through one engagement. Sure, one might have split- sometimes. Then again we could have armor or weapon failures as well. Certainly I don't think that all shields, or even most shields would have been destroyed in the amount of time it takes for us to finish 1 pass of the CoT.

Shields should not have hit points- just make them the right size & weight, and use them.

g-

PS- I can't help but imagine that pole axes and the like were used to take opponents to the ground where the full effect of a big swing could be used against the anvil of the ground.

white mountain armoury wrote:Bleddyn I dont think we can reach any hard conclusions from that statement.
A strong and expert man could simply be a soldier. I would think there were quite a few strong and expert men in an army.
It might be more helpful if we had an understanding of his station as the amount of armour worn and the quality of that armour could differ greatly based on social status.
I tend to think armour failuers were the exception but I certainly do believe they happened.

He was a squire as Froissart states so I take it he probably had decent if not good equipment.

Can we grab shields if we allow them in the 30 next time?

No, I am not "pushing to remove the kind of fighting I want from the normal SCA context."

What I *am* trying to do is stay interested in the SCA, which I love. I don't do SCA combat anymore- I haven't in years. I currently don't own a set of leg armour that I can knee fight in. I don't fight in any SCA context where I am forced to knee fight or switch hands.

I fight at practice (I don't knee fight there, but force my squires to do it if they want to be knighted- some don't want to be knights)

I fight at the ToC where I tell everyone I face that I don't knee fight or switch hands- they don't mind.

I fight at William Marshall tourneys sometimes where I take a good leg shot as a loss.

I fight in battles where I take a good leg shot as a loss. I do this because a very short guy on his knees is usually useless unless he has a shield (don't like it), and a spear guy with one arm is usually useless (unless his name is Nigel). I am confident enough in my abilities to consider a leg shot as big as a defensive mistake (on my part) as a head shot.

I don't fight at Candlemas or Christmas Tourney (big Ky. tournaments) anymore because I don't like knee fighting on a slick concrete floor. After I got into the top 15 a few times I was satisfied. I have been known to do pickups at these events.

I prefer counted blows recieved formats with all weapons (ala' Galleron) in Plaisance style (weapons blunted). Outrance style is risky to my shoulder, but I will do it to give the guys who are good at more people, therefore more spectacle. In Outrance combat I am forced to kill gentlemen that I would rather capture, but capturing people is very difficult for somebody my size.

I engaged in typical SCA types of contests (armoured guy -vs- flying naked guy, shield-guy-chases-glaive-guy-around) for 15 years straight, and I'm not interested anymore. I prefer matched weapons whenever possible. I hate seeing glaive/greatsword fighters try to fight with one hand, and I'm not interested in the endless interpretations of what a good shot is. I don't want to fight in Crown and I avoid contact with many Royal Peers who, to be perfectly frank, seem to have egos the size of Godzilla and/or have a screw loose in the uninteresting part of their mental machinery.

I am trying to follow the concept that no man of cote armour is my "enemy." If he "dies" by a blow that I know would have killed him I don't like it, and I consider it an unfortunate turn of Fortune's Wheel.

I find wayyy more people who consider me an enemy during the regular war points battles at Pennsic. I fight there out of responsibility. I live to interact with the CoTT crowd whenever possible, because they will never consider me an enemy, and if I am "killed" they will consider it a bad turn for me. Even if I was bleeding to death they would get me a priest and send ladies to sing for me, and if I were captured they would entertain me and treat me with extreme courtesy.

The average "warrior" on the SCA field is not into these things. He is into being awesome (hats and bats!!), kicking ass and taking names, refusing to engage me in knightly conversation on the field, or having his minions shoot me in the balls with a crossbow while they hide behind twenty men-at-arms so I cannot get to them.

When Rhys of Harlech raised his wine glass to me during a battle, after he and I pounded each other mercilessly, after he offered to slay the nearby trebuchet crew that was annoying me, and while the fight raged all around us, that was it. People think he's nuts. People think I'm nuts. We don't care. When I win, he considers it a fortunate thing for me. When he wins, he considers it a fortunate thing for himself- the Wheel turns.

If I were wounded to the death, he would send for a cart and send me to the nearest chapel. I would do the same for him. If he gets in my way I will hit him so hard he will lose his lunch, if I get in his way he will knock my head clean off. However- he will toast you because all good knights and squires roll the dice, and are ready to win or lose with gallantry.

That's what I'm into. Ask Stephen du Blois what I said to him after I dropped him like a sack of potatoes with a cup shot from Hell. I said-

"Favor for favor. My love to your noble House."

And then I started hitting the guys next to him.

That's what I'm into. It doesn't get in the way of SCA anything. I live in the SCA water, and do what I can to survive there, because that is where my friends are.

You speak my state of mind better than I can myself Vitus.

I know what you are, Magnus.

Sometimes because of my temper I get caught up in the wrong mindset, and I need my brothers to set me straight. If I'm really upset I don't like the process, but I will submit to correction if I start getting dragged back into the Land of Lame.

This is what happened with me and Johannes this year- I lost my head and was not thinking right. I was thinking in a churlish way and refusing to accept to abide by the judgement of the Wheel. I wanted to rail against Fortune, instead of accepting the outcome with grace and courtesy.

For this temporary lapse into idiocy I owe him and everyone there an eternal apology.

It's a struggle. Like I have said in my books over and over and over- this way of life doesn't come easy -or naturally- to me. To many of you who are not belted knights, who never stray from the Way, you are True.

I beg the patience of all True Knights, for this is not what I am. I was made a knight, and struggle with the ebb and flow of the tide.

I am still working on it as well, and will be to the grave, I am likely an improvement from my pierced shaved angry punk days.
I believe Charney stated more or less that while he did not expect perfection in knights he did expect them to strive for it.

Do you like the book I sent down to you with Eadric, makes me feel old

white mountain armoury wrote:I dont see how the 14th cent culture is stepping on any toes or is infringing on anyones good time or running over someone elses intrests.
If its not for you well you avoid it.
I avoid ninja and piarate culture, its not of intrest to me at all but I dont feel its stepping on my toes or running over my intrests.
I guess I dont understand where you are comming from.
I enjoy seeing a cohesive look every now and then.
I am a pretty visual guy, looking athte field and seeing everyone armed correctly for a specific period of time, and then modifying the targetting and blow counting to better address what it is to fight in that type of gear, I just dont see how anyone could look at it with negativity.
If you dont like it you dont do it. It has no effect on you.
The fighting is intense, but so was the front line of last years hardrians wall battle, that was some press, I loved that as well, but it did not transport me back in time as well as the 30.
In the 30 a magic crossbow bolt that kills all it touches does not enter the picture, I think thats a nice break, and I am a proponent of Combat Archery.

Magnus, I'm in favor of looking good too. I wish I were better at it

But, if you don't understand that there are people out there who are defining looking good as looking like we say you should look and that this is infringing on other people's fun, taste, etc. then I can't make you recognize it. It's definitely out there - even here where the 14th c. mafia is an extremely strong influence there are voices raised occasionally trying to speak for other views and getting pushed down by some.

I'm trying to say that the hardfought contest between intense combattants is the heart of the phenomenon. The setting does not make the contest, although it can help make the spectacle greater and that's a fine thing.

When we act as though that contest can only be found in some special setting - that's a mistake. It puts some places where it happens down and elevates others, and if the goal is the sense one gets from the contest, then anyplace it can be found is equal to any other.

Is there something somehow transcendent in the combination of the contest and the spectacle ? Possibly, and perhaps I am missing something in not having been there in the middle of it.

I'm not going to be able to adequately express the point I am trying to make in this medium, which, I must admit, is truly frustrating

Leo Medii wrote:

In a sense, you're pushing to remove the kind of fighting you want from the normal SCA context. I see that as just plain being a mistake. I think it's counter-productive for what I believe you want to accomplish and I'm sure it's counter-productive to the SCA list field as a whole.

Could you elaborate on this? I am certain I am not understanding your intent in it.

Vitus has clarified his position, and I see that he already had removed the kind of fighting he wants from the normal SCA context. I don't see this kind of separatist activity as productive.

And again, the limited expressive capacity of the medium makes it impossible for me to adequately express my view.

Its ok Gavin, this is not my meduim of choice either.
To be honest I have never heard any of "my" authenticity minded people force their portrayal on anyone, but just about evey member of my household has been told by the more sport focused community that our armoured portrayals need to go.
I have even been told that what I wear "is not what we wear in th east"
Basicly I have experienced just what you are getting at, but in reverse.
I dont even require any of my people to choose and era, only a crusading portrayal which covers a great deal of time, 1096 well into the 15th cent, likely beyond, infact we even have some heathen levy troops from the east.
I agree the spectacle does not make the contest like you said, fortunatly with the 30 the contest and spectacle are both quite high.
People can be cool or a tool regardless of portrayal. I would like to think the 30, or more importantly the "culture of deeds" attracts the cool.

white mountain armoury wrote:Its ok Gavin, this is not my meduim of choice either.
..
I have even been told that what I wear "is not what we wear in th east"
Basicly I have experienced just what you are getting at, but in reverse.
...

I will say that it's not the reverse, it's the same phenomenon. It dresses in lots of different ways, but there's a human nature thing about "we're cool and you're different - which makes you not cool". I never have much liked that aspect of human nature.

I prefer "you're not like me - cool! show me whatcha got!" But then, no one has ever called me normal.

Of late I have had more "what you guys are doing is the balls" than anything else. Lots of very positive feedback from many corners.

Thaddeus wrote:Of late I have had more "what you guys are doing is the balls" than anything else. Lots of very positive feedback from many corners.

Yes, I was on my way back to this thread to state that in the past year it has changed and now feedback is generally realy quite good.
It shows times have changed.
And yes Gavin I suppose tis the same, not the opposite, although atleast I know what I mean.
You seemd to imply the 14th cent crowd was guilty of this, that may be true, my past experience has been with sport focused vs authenticity focused but even that does not cover everything.

Cool -vs- Uncool doesn't apply here.

Yes Magnus, I got the book.
T-Bob's illustrations are the bomb.
Tanks.

Vitus, reading your post brought my eyes to tears. Those are the very reason that I have great love for you, and for all those who feel those words resound in thier hearts.

I will explain more later, but for now, it's to bed.

Wow. Sir, of all the things I have read by you, this strikes a chord in me.
Stripped bare to the bone, and like clear water.

I wish my mind was quicker of wit, so that when the chance for things like this happen on the field, I could respond to them properly, instead of wishing later that I had said or done that instead.






I hate quoting huge blocks like this, but I want to make clear of what I am referencing.

Vitus von Atzinger wrote:No, I am not "pushing to remove the kind of fighting I want from the normal SCA context."

What I *am* trying to do is stay interested in the SCA, which I love. I don't do SCA combat anymore- I haven't in years. I currently don't own a set of leg armour that I can knee fight in. I don't fight in any SCA context where I am forced to knee fight or switch hands.

I fight at practice (I don't knee fight there, but force my squires to do it if they want to be knighted- some don't want to be knights)

I fight at the ToC where I tell everyone I face that I don't knee fight or switch hands- they don't mind.

I fight at William Marshall tourneys sometimes where I take a good leg shot as a loss.

I fight in battles where I take a good leg shot as a loss. I do this because a very short guy on his knees is usually useless unless he has a shield (don't like it), and a spear guy with one arm is usually useless (unless his name is Nigel). I am confident enough in my abilities to consider a leg shot as big as a defensive mistake (on my part) as a head shot.

I don't fight at Candlemas or Christmas Tourney (big Ky. tournaments) anymore because I don't like knee fighting on a slick concrete floor. After I got into the top 15 a few times I was satisfied. I have been known to do pickups at these events.

I prefer counted blows recieved formats with all weapons (ala' Galleron) in Plaisance style (weapons blunted). Outrance style is risky to my shoulder, but I will do it to give the guys who are good at more people, therefore more spectacle. In Outrance combat I am forced to kill gentlemen that I would rather capture, but capturing people is very difficult for somebody my size.

I engaged in typical SCA types of contests (armoured guy -vs- flying naked guy, shield-guy-chases-glaive-guy-around) for 15 years straight, and I'm not interested anymore. I prefer matched weapons whenever possible. I hate seeing glaive/greatsword fighters try to fight with one hand, and I'm not interested in the endless interpretations of what a good shot is. I don't want to fight in Crown and I avoid contact with many Royal Peers who, to be perfectly frank, seem to have egos the size of Godzilla and/or have a screw loose in the uninteresting part of their mental machinery.

I am trying to follow the concept that no man of cote armour is my "enemy." If he "dies" by a blow that I know would have killed him I don't like it, and I consider it an unfortunate turn of Fortune's Wheel.

I find wayyy more people who consider me an enemy during the regular war points battles at Pennsic. I fight there out of responsibility. I live to interact with the CoTT crowd whenever possible, because they will never consider me an enemy, and if I am "killed" they will consider it a bad turn for me. Even if I was bleeding to death they would get me a priest and send ladies to sing for me, and if I were captured they would entertain me and treat me with extreme courtesy.

The average "warrior" on the SCA field is not into these things. He is into being awesome (hats and bats!!), kicking ass and taking names, refusing to engage me in knightly conversation on the field, or having his minions shoot me in the balls with a crossbow while they hide behind twenty men-at-arms so I cannot get to them.

When Rhys of Harlech raised his wine glass to me during a battle, after he and I pounded each other mercilessly, after he offered to slay the nearby trebuchet crew that was annoying me, and while the fight raged all around us, that was it. People think he's nuts. People think I'm nuts. We don't care. When I win, he considers it a fortunate thing for me. When he wins, he considers it a fortunate thing for himself- the Wheel turns.

If I were wounded to the death, he would send for a cart and send me to the nearest chapel. I would do the same for him. If he gets in my way I will hit him so hard he will lose his lunch, if I get in his way he will knock my head clean off. However- he will toast you because all good knights and squires roll the dice, and are ready to win or lose with gallantry.

That's what I'm into. Ask Stephen du Blois what I said to him after I dropped him like a sack of potatoes with a cup shot from Hell. I said-

"Favor for favor. My love to your noble House."

And then I started hitting the guys next to him.

That's what I'm into. It doesn't get in the way of SCA anything. I live in the SCA water, and do what I can to survive there, because that is where my friends are.