The ol' fighting from the knees debate!

Murdock · Post by **Murdock** » Thu Jan 29, 2004 10:20 am

Joa's right

we give unarmoured people the advatage of assumed armour plus the weight advantage of being nekked. But to give armoured people any benifit is just unfair. Gawd forbit one nekked genricelt with a madu loose a fight. Then the world might end, and even worse people might start *gasp* actually wearing armour!! OH NO!

Again making room for non medival personas in a medieval tournament.

Change veins

Getting stabbed sucks, i've been in knife fights and they are no fun. #1 you will get cut unless you end it fast. #2 to end it fast you have to get close enough to get cut. #3 Cut him as bad as possible when he wobbles or falls down hit him again and run/ drive to the hospital asap. #4 it don't really hurt at the time but man does it hurt ( and ich) later.

jester · Post by **jester** » Thu Jan 29, 2004 12:09 pm

Alternate formats for SCA combat that are already completely legal:

1) Armor as worn. Lots of variations on this theme but the best ones are simple. Have inspecting marshal's assign each fighter a number of blows based on the armor they are wearing. The more armor you are wearing, the more blows you can take. Or you can state that single-handed blows to armor are ignored, two-handed blows count as a telling blow, and any blow or thrust to an unarmored area counts. Lots more.

2)Submission. A counted blow tournament with the number of blows set at 1,000 or some other such ridiculously high number. Combatants fight until one admits defeat (cannot continue or aknowledges that his opponent has shown superior skill) or the judges decided that the combatants have sufficiently demonstrated their courage and prowess.

3)Counted blows received. You take 3 (or whatever number) of telling blows and you yield. This is historically accurate, by the way. In real life we can find examples of combats where the goal was to break six lances (not just make six passes) or a combat by Jaques LaLaing in which a set number of blows would be struck. It can also be found in fiction of the time (Tirant Lo Blanc) where the combat was to last until one combatant had drawn blood twenty times.

4)Counted blows thrown. Each participant gets to throw a set number of blows. Once you have thrown those blows, regardless of their effect or lack thereof, you are done. This one is also historically accurate.

5)Carried to the ground. Combat continues until one participant touches the ground with a part of his body other than his feet. Not as much fun since deliberate body to body contact has been forbidden, but this is a useful victory condition to be applied in conjunction with the submission standard.

6)Judged. Combat continues, without acting out wounds, until the judges (a good use for tired old dukes) declare and end (or one of the combatants yields). Judges declare a victor.

7)Acted wounds. The SCA's current standard.

You can mix and match these elements. For instance:

The Company of St. Sithney shall hold the field before the walls of Caer Baer against all comers this 31st Day of April, 2004. Those wishing a combat shall present their challenges by herald. Combats shall be with the axe, spear, sword, and dagger. All combats shall continue until one combatant is unable to continue, owns defeat, is carried to the ground, or driven from the list field. All combats shall be supervised by honorable judges, warriors of note, who shall end the combat if they feel the combatants have done enough.

Diglach Mac Cein · Post by **Diglach Mac Cein** » Thu Jan 29, 2004 12:28 pm

Again - - -

Hold any kind of tourney you want. Armour as worn, counted blows, tape a carrot on top of the helm and the winner is the guy who keeps his longest - it doesn't matter AS LONG AS YOU ARE NOT VIOLATING SCA RULES.

If you ARE going to change a rule so that it violates the rules of the list, do it as a NON-SCA tourney.

If people really want to do it, they'll show up...

BTW

Enough people have recently won Crowns in period armor that the whole "minimal armour is cheating" arguement isn't holding much water anymore...

Dilan

Vebrand · Post by **Vebrand** » Thu Jan 29, 2004 3:34 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Joaquin:
What's so wrong with prejudicing the fight in favor of late-period armours? I'm sick of the silly populist notion that some fool in a weightlifter's belt and a spangenhelm is on equal footing with me in my plate in terms of protection. If I'm going to go to the trouble to make/buy and wear the nice, heavy stuff, then I want to be rewarded for it. I feel those of us who do so add much more to the game than do those thugs who just throw a polyester tunic over some hockey gear and go out swinging. Ruling that it requires two or three (or more!) extra blows to take me down than it requires to take down some wanna-be celt in carpet armour would go far to correct the idiocy inherent in the current system.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's another dead horse on another thread. I think Murdock and I rode that poor horse to the grave. [img]http://forums.armourarchive.org/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img]

Vebrand

Ulrich · Post by **Ulrich** » Thu Jan 29, 2004 3:49 pm

All,

My point is there is room for all of these different types of combat styles. I see no point in legislating a different style as the "standard" when you can already use that style almost whenever you wish. -Or....what Jester said-

Alfred,

Yes I am very much for the standards of appearance. I think it is very important to look good. However, I am also for the 10 foot rule. If you can stand 10 foot away from someone and their rig looks good, and close to historical, let it slide. Part of my reason for this is, well my armor is plastic lamellar. While not my preference, the plates were a birthday present from my wife. (For those of you who aren't married, that means I wear plastic armor, and I like it.) But frankly you really can't tell until your up on me.

As far as supporting counted blows as a system, for appearance, I just don't agree on a personal level. But thatâ€™s me, and just my opinion. I donâ€™t think that the way we do things is particularly hard to watch; on the contrary I find it easy to follow, explain and understand. All of that goes a long way at a demo, and for the populace. And believe me I don't feel like I've mastered anything, I've done both, and I just happen to like our current system better. However, if the SEM came out tomorrow and said, "Counted blows" combat will be our new system. I'd still fight; itâ€™s just that while it is fun, itâ€™s not AS enjoyable to me as our current system.

Murdock,

Sorry man but the Genera-celt madu argument just doesn't hold water anymore. Yes they are still out there, but they aren't the ones being successful for the most part. I went to 40 events last year, not one time did I see someone with a Madu win a list, and heck I probably only saw 3 of them (madu's)in use the entire time. For that matter, I can only think of 5 people who won tournaments at events where I was present who would fit part of your criteria (mostly unarmored). And two of those were HRM Gareth, and Duke Ailgheanan. (And for the record you could put those two in full plate and they'd still win). Heck if you look at this past year at the local Camp Arnold events, only one of the tournaments in the last long while there were won by someone who didn't wear much armor. That was Baron Olaf (Mongo) other than him, I think Sir Caspar has won 3, Count Aengus 3, Sir Iain 2, myself 2, and Count Seth 1 and we all wear armor. Turns out successful genera-celts (at least in Meridies), are turning into an urban legend.

Regards,
Ulrich

[This message has been edited by Ulrich (edited 01-29-2004).]

Thorstenn · Post by **Thorstenn** » Thu Jan 29, 2004 5:15 pm

So how many hit points for my KLINGON armor? [img]http://forums.armourarchive.org/ubb/smile.gif[/img]

also whats wrong with genera-celt? That sounds more like a personal vendetta to me not really the topic.

Asbjorn Johansen · Post by **Asbjorn Johansen** » Thu Jan 29, 2004 10:57 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ulrich:

As far as supporting counted blows as a system, for appearance, I just don't agree on a personal level. But thatâ€™s me, and just my opinion. I donâ€™t think that the way we do things is particularly hard to watch; on the contrary I find it easy to follow, explain and understand. All of that goes a long way at a demo, and for the populace.
[This message has been edited by Ulrich (edited 01-29-2004).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A demo is the exactly when we should not being doing acted wounds.

We know its wrong.

We know its incorrect portrayal of pre 1600 combat.

The SCA purports to be an educational organization focused on pre 1600 history.

Why would we want to deliberately show folks what we know is wrong.

------------------
Asbjorn

In Modo Antiquo
Or, a demi-fleur-de-lis sable
www.historiccombat.org

dukelogan · Post by **dukelogan** » Fri Jan 30, 2004 12:34 am

but dont forget that we have the shields that can not be destroyed, the arrows that destroy anything they touch, half naked idiots walking around, tuchuxs, wait i mentioned that.....

i agree with you 100% that it is wrong. but then again i wrote into law here that somethings would no longer be accepted and i got a little sh!t over it. wow. how bizarre.

regards
logan

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Asbjorn Johansen:

A demo is the exactly when we should not being doing acted wounds.

We know its wrong.

We know its incorrect portrayal of pre 1600 combat.

The SCA purports to be an educational organization focused on pre 1600 history.

Why would we want to deliberately show folks what we know is wrong.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Diglach Mac Cein · Post by **Diglach Mac Cein** » Fri Jan 30, 2004 8:19 am

Which is why I (and the fighters in my local group) explain our combat as "In the SPORT of SCA combat, this is why we do things this way....."

Same way some of our A&S people explain, "In the actual Middle Ages, they did THIS, but that is harmfull or hazerdous, so we do *THIS* instead." Like lead in cosmetics, or certain metals in pigments for painting / illumination.

Again, if you want to do completely realistc WMA with rattan, full speed, with full targeting, counted blows, grappling, GO FOR IT! Noone is stopping you - just don't do it as an SCA event.

If you are bound and determined that the SCA must change - then do it for a while, record what happens at your events, THEN approach the SCA with a proposal. Show the safety record, the popularity, problems and solutions. From what I understand, this is what the fencing community did with sidesword, and it is going forward.

Dilan

jester · Post by **jester** » Fri Jan 30, 2004 10:33 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Irish:

If you are bound and determined that the SCA must change - then do it for a while, record what happens at your events, THEN approach the SCA with a proposal. Show the safety record, the popularity, problems and solutions. From what I understand, this is what the fencing community did with sidesword, and it is going forward.

Dilan<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is, unfortunately a haphazard way to go about it. It would be nice if the Society had a published standard that made the above paragraph policy and put forth the basic information that they need to see to evaluate the safety and popularity of the activity. It would also be nice to know what information our insurance carrier needs to see.

In my opinion Sidesword got passed because the proponents of the program were Society and Kingdom level officers.

Asbjorn Johansen · Post by **Asbjorn Johansen** » Fri Jan 30, 2004 10:59 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by dukelogan:
but dont forget that we have the shields that can not be destroyed, the arrows that destroy anything they touch, half naked idiots walking around, tuchuxs, wait i mentioned that.....

i agree with you 100% that it is wrong. but then again i wrote into law here that somethings would no longer be accepted and i got a little sh!t over it. wow. how bizarre.

regards
logan

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If it helps I thought your law one of the best steps forward a kingdom has made in the past decade.

Its a continuous process of improvement, like any educational endeavor. Just because we have a, b, and c wrong doesn't mean we should turn down the chance to fix d.

Asbjorn

Asbjorn Johansen · Post by **Asbjorn Johansen** » Fri Jan 30, 2004 1:09 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Irish:
Which is why I (and the fighters in my local group) explain our combat as "In the SPORT of SCA combat, this is why we do things this way....."

Same way some of our A&S people explain, "In the actual Middle Ages, they did THIS, but that is harmfull or hazerdous, so we do *THIS* instead." Like lead in cosmetics, or certain metals in pigments for painting / illumination.

Dilan<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But there is a central difference, not using acted wounds does not introduce a significant safety hazard, or even significant monetary costs to the participants, it simply violates an SCA tradition.

To follow your example, I doubt most A&S researchers would accept this in a recipe "we have found that apple juice is a more correct ingredient to this recipe, but have chosen to use grape juice because that is what we the SCA has always done".

As part of an organization that purports to educate concerning pre 1600 culture, it would seem to be appropriate for us to improve our recreation of combat where we can, particularly when the change would be so simple.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Irish:


If you are bound and determined that the SCA must change - then do it for a while, record what happens at your events, THEN approach the SCA with a proposal. Show the safety record, the popularity, problems and solutions. From what I understand, this is what the fencing community did with sidesword, and it is going forward.

Dilan<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Many of us have and do, the problem as Jester related is getting the marshallate to recognize what has been done.

Asbjorn

Condottieri · Post by **Condottieri** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 10:38 am

When I first saw the "point of honor" I admired it. It shows that the person wishes to fight fair. But I thought more about it, it seems that it isnt fighting fair. The one who loses their leg should go to their knees, but the one who is left standing should recognize that they out of greater skill have put their enemy to the ground. They were better (or luckier) so they have the right to remain standing and should do so. It is not period (or at least I dont think it is) to fight from your knees when your enemy is wounded. Life and death is the game, and taking whatever advantage should be the rules. I'm about ready to stray off on some tangent, so I'll leave it at this. Alex

mordreth · Post by **mordreth** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 11:41 am

Joaquin wrote:What's so wrong with prejudicing the fight in favor of late-period armours? I'm sick of the silly populist notion that some fool in a weightlifter's belt and a spangenhelm is on equal footing with me in my plate in terms of protection. If I'm going to go to the trouble to make/buy and wear the nice, heavy stuff, then I want to be rewarded for it. I feel those of us who do so add much more to the game than do those thugs who just throw a polyester tunic over some hockey gear and go out swinging. Ruling that it requires two or three (or more!) extra blows to take me down than it requires to take down some wanna-be celt in carpet armour would go far to correct the idiocy inherent in the current system.

Well for starters, given the rules of the lists for the group, your armor doesn't exist any more than the carpet belt your opponent is wearing does.
The reward you receive for wearing a heavy plate harness comes at the end of the day when you have performed well in a historically accurate harness.
The second end of day reward you receive is that I am sure you feel a lot better than the folks fighting in gambeson and mail (like me) do.

FrauHirsch · Post by **FrauHirsch** » Tue Feb 03, 2004 12:15 pm

Condottieri wrote:When I first saw the "point of honor" I admired it. It shows that the person wishes to fight fair. Alex

The interesting dynamic I see is when people appear to give up their legs as a "point of honor", but really they just can't see very well looking down from their helm, or its obvious that they realize their round shield will then have to cover more territory and basically don't know how to fight a legged man well to offset that.

I saw that a few times at the tourney last weekend. I think its funny.

Several tall guys have even admitted they go down if they leg me, because I am so short, they can't see what is going on ...
and don't know what to do to counter it while standing.

Sheesh. And that is partially how it started out here in Caid, one guy started doing it because he was *better* from his knees, and then it became entrenched as some "Chivalric" tradition... which has only come about within the last 10 yrs or so here and certainly many of us teach our people that dropping to your knees when you leg someone is hogwash.

-J

Animal · Post by **Animal** » Wed Feb 04, 2004 9:35 pm

Joaquin wrote that he wanted to have the benefit of his plate armour when he fights. I can understand that, no worries. However, if he insists upon his plate armour being that realistic in the benefit of the protection it affords him then he shouldnt mind when he gets knocked to the ground and stabbed in his eye just like the guys who wore the real stuff way back when did. Just sayin.

Asbjorn Johansen · Post by **Asbjorn Johansen** » Wed Feb 04, 2004 9:47 pm

I don't know about Joaquin but as long as the dagger is rattan you are more then welcome to try...

Josh W · Post by **Josh W** » Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:51 am

Animal, I would welcome a change in the SCA combat rules that recognized that knocking him over and sticking a dagger in a gap somewhere was one of the few reliable ways to defeat a man in plate armour.