Body contact opinions (SCA)

[Josh W]

Sometimes, Logan has good ideas.

The SCA would probably be lots more fun if he ran it.

[dukelogan]

i assume you think all charges are dangrous then since there is no difference at all between knocking smeone down with a shield and knocking smeone down with your torso.

regards
logan

Dukelogan. Have no fear that i will feel you as sniping.

I entered this discussion wanting to learn something. I know i am no authority on this matter, and therefore i am stating what i currently think and know of the rules.

It has just been my experience with the rules, that body to body contact when being done with the intent of a charge, is bad.

But as you say, charge with your stomach, and it is not that unsafe. I'm thinking more in the harder kinds of a charge.

just try and see if i can get my point here across.... (might have to change it if it sounds wrong)

A man uses a weapon on another person. It has a relative small area of impact but creates alot of force on that small area. That is what the rules usually cover and that's why the armor rules are in place. But this hit, will not move a persons body, as not enough force can be put into it. (talking swords here not spears)

Now a man rams into another person, he has a large chance of being moved by the ramming man, and are therefore prone to injuries that the armor will never protect against. Ie sprained ankles, broken legs or arms as results of falling uncontrolled, or even more serious injuries.

The way i see it is that if someone starts body ramming people, we will be more prone to injuries as they have in american football, and that doesn't to me seem like a good thing.

So yes, i'm a person who thinks other persons safety are paramount... in that you have read true.

And i know that i could charge with my body into other persons, so they would have a good chance of injuring themselves in the fall. And if i can, many many others can too.

But i have no idea if my interpretation of the rules are correct. But i will take this up with my kingdom marshall to be sure i can learn what is correct here in drachenwald at least...

guess we have to realize that certain kingdoms does it differently as well...

edit : and don't worry that i'm setting very hard points... i'm actually more looking at each event that happens, and judging from there.

[Titus Flavius]

hehe me bad... i was completely focused on that one scene... didn't really think about the general rules...

thanks for educating me dukelogan...

Regards, Titus

[dukelogan]

[Koredono]

you said:
It's my impression on reading this that intentional body to body contact is illegal under any combat circumstances

so who would you sanction in a greatsword fight if the two fighters closed tight to each other and body contact was made? if, say, they both wanted to fight chest to chest?

regards
logan

First, let me say that I've never seen this happen, two fighters in single combat, with any form, who both appeared to want to be in physical contact with each other, and especially wanted to maintain physical contact while continuing to fighter.

In this hypothetical instance, and it appeared that they were both moving towards each other when contact occurred, and especially if neither was making any more to end the body contact, I suppose what I would do is just let them fight it out, though possibly mention to them after the fight that, in fact, what they did is illegal by Society regulations, and had either one of them done that to an opponent who didn't want body-to-body contact, I probably would have to stop the fight and make them re-center, and start the fight afresh.

[Koredono]

wait, let me see if i understand you....

so if i gently bump him out of the way with my hip, for example, to his hip you call that illegal (based on what law?)

As I stated previously, the news from the Society Marshal from August 4 2003, which was decided on by the SEM, but there has not been a revision to the Marshal's Handbook since that time, so it's not in there (yet). But yes, that is illegal. No question, IMO, regardless of force.

but youre cool with me delivering a full on charge with my shoulder as long as it touches his spear haft first?

Since I'm not sure exactly what you mean here, I'm going to put it in other words to clarify for me: if you were to deliver a full-on charge with your shoulder (so long asyou're not breaking any rules specifically relating to charges), and impact his spear and not his body at any time, then yes, that would be perfectly legal.

further, since sheild on weapon contact is also legal i assume youre cool with me charging into his spear haft (first) on a full charge with my shield.

Again, so long as your shield contacted *only* his spear, and not his body, then that would be legal.

but youre not ok with me say, opening my shield to bump him off the bridge/out of the way with my belly?

Correct. Since it's much more difficult to legislate what is and is not 'appropriate force', especially under such an instance, the most we can do is legislate what kind of contact is legal, and that's cut and dried: of the 9 kinds possibilities, 6 are legal - body on weapon is legal, weapon on weapon is legal, body on shield is legal, weapon on shield is legal, shield on weapon is legal, and weapon on body - and 2 are not - shield on body, and body on body; IMO weapon on body is kinda grey - it looks like it's legal (how can we tell a shove with a weapon as opposed to just a really poor shot?) but since it's an object held by the aggressor and used directly against the body, I've always been kind of iffy about it, and really try to avoid doing that myself.

Now, whether I'm "cool" with body slamming someone (in the shield or weapon) would be determined more by whether than action a) appeared to deliver what I would otherwise consider 'excessive force', or b) was otherwise clearly, and possibly intentionally, dangerous to the other combattant; if neither was the case, then yes, I suppose I'd be "cool" with it.

just wanting to understand.

Sure. And i think that this is a good thing - misunderstandings cause so much unnecessary strife, and clear communications with remove it are so very important.

thanks again

logan

No problem.

[paulb]

Koredono,

Could you explain under what circumstances you consider body to shield contact to be legal?

Paulb

[Broadway]

IMO weapon on body is kinda grey - it looks like it's legal (how can we tell a shove with a weapon as opposed to just a really poor shot?)

What if it is really obvious? Like, two men on a bridge, and one places his basket hilt (of a sword) on the other's chest, and then shoves him back over the hay bales?

[ColinG]

What if it is really obvious? Like, two men on a bridge, and one places his basket hilt (of a sword) on the other's chest, and then shoves him back over the hay bales?

What about a spearman or glaive man crosschecking an opponent over the side?

Could you explain under what circumstances you consider body to shield contact to be legal?

though I don't use this technique I should think using your elbow or knee to move your opponent's shield would qualify. Going the other way. If a shieldman charges a spearman and the spearman purposefully moves his spear out of the way to take the charge on his shoulder (or whatever reason) then the shield to body contact would not be illegal.

[jester]

Clarification published in the BoD minutes last year clearly states that weapon on body pushing (such as with the haft of a polearm) is legal. We discussed the issue here, I sent a query to the (then) SEM, he responded and the clarification appeared in the minutes of the next BoD meeting.

I'm not a marshal or officer of the Society but I tend to agree with Koredono. The way the rules stand right now, body to body contact is very arguably prohibited by the clarification on grappling because the clarification is fairly broad.

[St. George]

Koredono,

I have seen body to body contact many times in singles fights. Albeit most often in Atlantia, and it is not as common as it used to be, but there were the day's of Open shield form (like Oldecastle) fighting, and people's big bellies coming to gether quite often.

People used to comment on how stupid fighting looked back then all the time, that there was little skill involved, and that it was all about big guys running into one another belly to belly and swining sticks. We have evolved a little as a martial culture since then though

likewise, I have seen people use their bodies on the Bridge to knock people off countless times. It happens. There is no getting around it.

The best way to do so is alter the scenarios so that less of it happens.

Alaric

[paulb]

Paulb wrote:
Could you explain under what circumstances you consider body to shield contact to be legal?

ColinG wrote:
though I don't use this technique I should think using your elbow or knee to move your opponent's shield would qualify. Going the other way. If a shieldman charges a spearman and the spearman purposefully moves his spear out of the way to take the charge on his shoulder (or whatever reason) then the shield to body contact would not be illegal.

* * *

I realize that this is getting off the point of the thread, so I'll only make this comment, then stop talking about it, since I know that there are other interpretations.

Grasping a shield is forbidden by the rules, but this has been interpreted by some to mean that other body parts may be used to manipulate the shield. I strongly disagree with this interpretation, but the rule is poorly written, and allows other interpretations. The EM's clarifications allow incidental contact, so I would agree with the spearman taking a charge on his shoulder.

The rules specifically state that a shield may be used to manipulate another shield. Again, the rule does not go far enough, since it does not specifically address the point, but I would interpret this as forbidding, by omission, using the body to manipulate the shield. Again, I admit that other interpretations exist.

Paulb

[blackbow]

Koredono,

Could you explain under what circumstances you consider body to shield contact to be legal?

Paulb

Paul:

Whether Koredono answers or not, I'm going to chime in here, since I had to deal with this one. About three years ago I went to His Grace Logan (then King) the night before Crown and asked him if he thought it would be legal for me to shoulderblock people who were "fighting" weapon/shield but were basically rushing flat out at me with their impenetrable, unbreakable, unrealistic shield in front of them thereby cutting off any shots I might have on them. We looked at all the rules then in place and couldn't find anything illegal about body-to-shield contact, it basically boiling down to who initiated the contact as to whether it was s-2-b or b-2-s. In short, if I had just stood there and opened my arms while the charge was taking place, I would have taken the charge just as a defensive player in basketball attempting to draw the foul. Since I wasn't interested in that, there were only a few options left, and running backward wasn't one of them that was going to win the fight.

So I did it the next day. Of course the marshals had a collective litter of kittens about it, but when we flipped open the rulebook they couldn't find anything legally against it and allowed it to continue. Some of them found it to be brutish and lacking in skill, but they weren't able to tell me what about the shield-wielding fighter had any skill in it either.

I shoulderblocked I think 4 different people multiple times that one day. Amazingly enough, nobody bumrushes me any more. The irony is that if the rusher were using proper technique instead of a flat-out run, it would be useless to shoulderblock them, because they wouldn't have one foot off the ground at all times. So, they rush me with bad technique, and I shoulderblock them, and they quickly learn to rush correctly, or they die. Or, they rush me with proper technique, and there's no use in shoulderblocking them.

I have had the alternatives to shoulderblocking pointed out to me a few times, and there's only one alternative that doesn't suck, as far as I'm concerned. But since I think simply flat-out rushing somebody just because you've got an unbreakable, unrealistic shield is tacky, I will continue to respond in the manner to which i have become accustomed, until and unless the rules are changed to prohibit it. At that point, assuming the rule is changed to prohibit body-on-body contact as has been done here in Atlantia, I will simply raise my weapon above my head, which will make me invulnerable to charges.

How f'n realistic is that? Not at all. But since my remaining options will be gone, I won't much care.

Ironically enough, I was at a fighter practice a few weeks ago and was charged by a weapon/shield fighting individual who, as he charged me, was clearly COUNTING on the theory that I would block him with my weapon. If I hadn't knocked him on his butt with my spear into his shield, he'd have plowed right through me with his shield directly into my torso. And i guarantee not a word would have been said, regardless of how much of a rules violation it would have been.

Regards,

Jonathan Blackbow

[paulb]

Johnathan,

I agree. I use shoulder blocking when I fight with a glaive (which I like to do). My glaive style is an inside game, and right up against the shield is where I want to be.

The concern that I expressed in my earlier letter were for the practice of using a knee or elbow to hook or press your opponent's shield in a situation that did not include a shield charging a pole weapon - such as using your knee to move aside the shield of an opponent on his/her knees.

Paulb

[blackbow]

Johnathan,

I agree. I use shoulder blocking when I fight with a glaive (which I like to do). My glaive style is an inside game, and right up against the shield is where I want to be.

The concern that I expressed in my earlier letter were for the practice of using a knee or elbow to hook or press your opponent's shield in a situation that did not include a shield charging a pole weapon - such as using your knee to move aside the shield of an opponent on his/her knees.

Paulb

pin in place, maybe; kick out of the way, naah. I use my shield for that.

JB

[ColinG]

At that point, assuming the rule is changed to prohibit body-on-body contact as has been done here in Atlantia, I will simply raise my weapon above my head, which will make me invulnerable to charges.

Jonathan,

As a marshal, if I saw a spearman purposefully lift his spear out of the way in order to cause a shield charge to falter I would gladly walk over and pick the spearman up off of his back and ask him if he had learned his lesson. I know you were just saying that to make a point but we are men of honor and far to competitive in nature to try and win a scenario by rule's lawyering and munipulation as this example describes. No Atlantian fighter I know would dare lift his/her weapon above the head in a sign of surrender before they had given their all for House and Home.

Colin G

[RMorgenstern]

At that point, assuming the rule is changed to prohibit body-on-body contact as has been done here in Atlantia, I will simply raise my weapon above my head, which will make me invulnerable to charges.

Jonathan,

As a marshal, if I saw a spearman purposefully lift his spear out of the way in order to cause a shield charge to falter I would gladly walk over and pick the spearman up off of his back and ask him if he had learned his lesson.

Colin G

With respect to trying to expose your body to avoid a charge, I would first point out that using the rules to take advantage of your opponent in such a manner is in violation of Society Rule III. B. 6:
"Any behavior that takes deliberate advantage of an opponent’s chivalry or safety-consciousness, or that takes deliberate unfair advantage of an opponent, is prohibited."
Second, you are now wide open to be whacked with a weapon.

- Roland, the unwitting troublemaker who apparently started all this

[Koredono]

Koredono,

Could you explain under what circumstances you consider body to shield contact to be legal?

Paulb

From my interpretation of the rules as written, all body to shield contact that is initiated by the 'body' rather than the 'shield', except for grabbing hold of the shield (specifically prohibited), is legal, though there are a few that I would consider dangerous and stop the fight over (like head-butting the shield with a charge - that's probably pretty dangerous for the butt-er, though technically legal).
IMO, it is legal to slam into someone's shield with your shoulder, or even maneuever it around with, say, your thigh, or elbow, or even the back of your hand (though with an open palm, that might be kinda dangerous), so long as you're not getting a hold of the shield.
And so long as the contact is continuous, it remains legal.

OTOH, all body to shield contact initiated by the 'shield' is illegal, under all circumstances.

Is this radically different from either your interpretation of the rules, or your experience? I must say that this is more restrictive than it was in my area during most of the earlier parts of my fighting career, when it was legal to grab shields, and kicking shields had just become illegal right around when I began fighting.

[Koredono]

IMO weapon on body is kinda grey - it looks like it's legal (how can we tell a shove with a weapon as opposed to just a really poor shot?)

What if it is really obvious? Like, two men on a bridge, and one places his basket hilt (of a sword) on the other's chest, and then shoves him back over the hay bales?

Basket hilts have always a grey area for me (as a marshal), especially with all of the recent discussions on whether they're armor or not. If the attacker placed the basket hilt on his opponent's chest, clearly not hard or fast enough to be considered in and of itself an illegal blow, and then pushed him with his weapon, then I think that might be legal; certainly, if he pushed with the rattan part of the weapon and used none of the basket, it would be legal.

I think the most honest answer I can give is that if I were a marshal in that situation, it would really depend on exactly how it looked to me, and on a case-by-case basis; I know that's not as cut-and-dried as you might have wanted, but it is the best I can do, sorry.

[dukelogan]

another faulty interpretation of the rule comes from our marshallate. roland if my spear fighting technique was such that i fought with my spear over my head (like jonathans question) i am, in fact, invulnerable to charges. since our new atlantian law states that it is perfectly fine for me to charge into a guy and slam my sheild into his spear haft / polearm / dual weapons, etc and not for me to gently move him out of the way with my body it is not legal to charge me while my spear is used in such a way (dukes uther and edmund might be tall enough). to comment that one is "now open to get whacked with a weapon" is any different than the spearman was with his spear below his belt is off as well.

same thing goes with the way some of the wacky dual weapon fighters fight with their arms all up and over their heads. cant charge them either. used to be for at least the last 15 years) i had the option of closing with them and using my sheild to cover my back against the wrap(s) and keeping our bodys close enough so that a forward shot wasnt a threat. now one of us would be in violation of this ridiculous rule.

this new atlantian rule prohibiting body to body contact is not based on safety, its not based on any clarification of any society rule, and its not based on the whim of our king. it is, in no uncertain terms, the whim of the earl marshals office and based soley on personal preferences from that office. its stupid and serves no one. im saddened by the fact that we now have rules dictated by fiat that are baseless. i have no problem complying with it. i just would prefer to make gentle controlled contact with people over slamming their weapons into them. but thats not really my problem if those are the rules.


regards
logan

At that point, assuming the rule is changed to prohibit body-on-body contact as has been done here in Atlantia, I will simply raise my weapon above my head, which will make me invulnerable to charges.

Jonathan,

As a marshal, if I saw a spearman purposefully lift his spear out of the way in order to cause a shield charge to falter I would gladly walk over and pick the spearman up off of his back and ask him if he had learned his lesson.

Colin G

With respect to trying to expose your body to avoid a charge, I would first point out that using the rules to take advantage of your opponent in such a manner is in violation of Society Rule III. B. 6:
"Any behavior that takes deliberate advantage of an opponent’s chivalry or safety-consciousness, or that takes deliberate unfair advantage of an opponent, is prohibited."
Second, you are now wide open to be whacked with a weapon.

- Roland, the unwitting troublemaker who apparently started all this

[Koredono]

What if it is really obvious? Like, two men on a bridge, and one places his basket hilt (of a sword) on the other's chest, and then shoves him back over the hay bales?

What about a spearman or glaive man crosschecking an opponent over the side?

It depends on what you mean by 'crosschecking' (an argument I've gotten into before): - if you mean 'place the haft of the weapon against his body and push', then I would consider that legal; if you mean 'whack him with the haft and he happens to go over', then that would be illegal, since you've clearly struck a blow with a non-striking area of the weapon, even if the intent was not to make your opponent to take the strike as a good blow, but to cause some other consequence (like going over the hay bale, in your instance).

Could you explain under what circumstances you consider body to shield contact to be legal?

though I don't use this technique I should think using your elbow or knee to move your opponent's shield would qualify. Going the other way. If a shieldman charges a spearman and the spearman purposefully moves his spear out of the way to take the charge on his shoulder (or whatever reason) then the shield to body contact would not be illegal.

True; I hadn't considered that in my response to His Grace, but I believe that would be a situation where the body on shield contact, though technically initiated by the shield, might not in fact not the 'fault' of the shield, but be a completely pre-meditated consequence of the spear. This is something else that can be full of grey areas, and must each be viewed on an individual basis, but I think in general, I would not blame the shield if the spear appeared to intentionally take it in the body rather than in his weapon.

[dukelogan]

sheild on body contact is perfectly legal koredono. unless that has been changed suddenly. could you please cite the rule that states that supports your claim:


all body to shield contact initiated by the 'shield' is illegal, under all circumstances

and im curious, if a person choose to "head-butt" someones shield why on earth would you stop a fight? not my style mind you but we cant go around stopping fights based on our preferences. sure, if a guy torpedo dives head first into a shield wall it might be worth keeping an eye on him to see if he is mentally stable or not. but automatically stopping a fight because something might could be maybe dangerous? not sure im willing to make that determination. poor footwear accounts for far more injuries than does head to sheild contact yet we dont stop guys with bad shoes from fighting.

regards
logan

Koredono,

Could you explain under what circumstances you consider body to shield contact to be legal?

Paulb

From my interpretation of the rules as written, all body to shield contact that is initiated by the 'body' rather than the 'shield', except for grabbing hold of the shield (specifically prohibited), is legal, though there are a few that I would consider dangerous and stop the fight over (like head-butting the shield with a charge - that's probably pretty dangerous for the butt-er, though technically legal).
IMO, it is legal to slam into someone's shield with your shoulder, or even maneuever it around with, say, your thigh, or elbow, or even the back of your hand (though with an open palm, that might be kinda dangerous), so long as you're not getting a hold of the shield.
And so long as the contact is continuous, it remains legal.

OTOH, all body to shield contact initiated by the 'shield' is illegal, under all circumstances.

Is this radically different from either your interpretation of the rules, or your experience? I must say that this is more restrictive than it was in my area during most of the earlier parts of my fighting career, when it was legal to grab shields, and kicking shields had just become illegal right around when I began fighting.

[Koredono]

Koredono,

I have seen body to body contact many times in singles fights. Albeit most often in Atlantia, and it is not as common as it used to be, but there were the day's of Open shield form (like Oldecastle) fighting, and people's big bellies coming to gether quite often.

I had forgotten how popular that style had been, even though I was taught in my early days by someone of that lineage and still revert to it on the rare occasions I use a shield; we just don't get that many who are proficieint with it up my way.
In the fights I have seen where that could have happened it would have been difficult to perceive accurately, because the shields and bodies would have obscured the view, and it's never really come up in my area, to my knowledge.

People used to comment on how stupid fighting looked back then all the time, that there was little skill involved, and that it was all about big guys running into one another belly to belly and swining sticks.

I'll admit I haven't seen much of that, but I can easily see how that could be the case.

We have evolved a little as a martial culture since then though

I hope so too

likewise, I have seen people use their bodies on the Bridge to knock people off countless times. It happens. There is no getting around it.

To be honest, I've seen people used their bodies to knock people off bridges a lot too, and even done it myself, but I cannot say I'm particularly aware of it being done via direct body-to-body contact, more often against a shield, or against/with a weapon.

The best way to do so is alter the scenarios so that less of it happens.

Alaric

If that's perceived as a problem, sure.

[Koredono]

Could you explain under what circumstances you consider body to shield contact to be legal?

though I don't use this technique I should think using your elbow or knee to move your opponent's shield would qualify. Going the other way. If a shieldman charges a spearman and the spearman purposefully moves his spear out of the way to take the charge on his shoulder (or whatever reason) then the shield to body contact would not be illegal.

I realize that this is getting off the point of the thread, so I'll only make this comment, then stop talking about it, since I know that there are other interpretations.

Grasping a shield is forbidden by the rules, but this has been interpreted by some to mean that other body parts may be used to manipulate the shield. I strongly disagree with this interpretation, but the rule is poorly written, and allows other interpretations. The EM's clarifications allow incidental contact, so I would agree with the spearman taking a charge on his shoulder.

The rules specifically state that a shield may be used to manipulate another shield. Again, the rule does not go far enough, since it does not specifically address the point, but I would interpret this as forbidding, by omission, using the body to manipulate the shield. Again, I admit that other interpretations exist.

Paulb

While I'm not saying that your interpretation of the rules is wrong, in any way, because if nothing else your reasoning is completely valid and cogent, I will admit that I am surprised by it, just because of the feeling I've gotten of the general culture of Western fightig when it comes to the rules as written (in recent discussions with upper-level and highly experienced fighters and marshals); the impression I've been given is that, over the course of 40 years of fighting in the West, only the things that are expressly forbbiden are, in fact, illegal, and beyond that, everything else that's omitted is implicitly legal until defined otherwise. Is my view of the Western martial mentality completely off, or is yours unusual for the West?

Regardless, I think it's because of these somewhat different interpretations of the rules as written compared with trying to figure out what they actually mean, which have caused the SEMs to, in dialogue with the KEMs and such, continue to re-write the MHB so that rulings are far more explicit, and hopefully cause fewer misunderstandings and confusions.

[paulb]

Koredono,

Actually, the attitude in the West varies. Some things come up as customs in certain areas, and become "traditions" for some of the fighters, and not for others. The main one that comes to mind is the practice of not taking arms. Some fighters in the West hold that as a tradition, others (including myself) do not.

The point which we're discussing is another of those, although I believe that my opinion is held by a very sizeable majority - probably almost all of the fighters.

As we've agreed, though. the rules allow various interpretations.

Paulb

[ColinG]

...if my spear fighting technique was such that i fought with my spear over my head (like jonathans question) i am, in fact, invulnerable to charges.

This reminds my of a story where a knight visiting another kingdom, where it is considered unchivalrous to target arms, faced fighters that laid their arms across their heads to protect them from wraps. When the visiting knight struck the fighter’s head guarding arm repeatedly the fighter stopped the fight and proceeded to explain to the knight that he was unchivalrously hitting his arm. The visiting knight said, “Well I was aiming for your head. I must confess I’m having a hard time reaching it through your arm but I’m going to keep trying till I get my targeting down.â€Â

[ColinG]

and im curious, if a person choose to "head-butt" someones shield why on earth would you stop a fight? not my style mind you but we cant go around stopping fights based on our preferences. sure, if a guy torpedo dives head first into a shield wall it might be worth keeping an eye on him to see if he is mentally stable or not. but automatically stopping a fight because something might could be maybe dangerous?

Helmets are inspected to ensure the safety of the person wearing it not as a weapon. Turning your helmet into a spear is just a bad idea and horrifically unsafe. Understanding that you would rather belly bump someone rather than run into them with your shield I'd sure hope you'd rather hit them with your shield then with the point of your helm. If you commit to a charge and lower your head you probably won't see how things changed on the field causing you to accidentally spear someone in the chest when their shield got jostled and moved in the chaos.

Colin G

[dukelogan]

ummmm.... ok, did you mean to respond to someone elses post colin? you didnt address anything i said. i mean, it is illegal in atlantia (for the time being) to make any body to body contact with someone. its illegal to strike someone with a sheild. so my point was that if a fighter fights with say a spear over his head (which ive done a number of times to shoot over other targets) he is, by the rules in atlantia, invulnerable to a charge.

i dont know, maybe i wasnt clear.

regards
logan

...if my spear fighting technique was such that i fought with my spear over my head (like jonathans question) i am, in fact, invulnerable to charges.

This reminds my of a story where a knight visiting another kingdom, where it is considered unchivalrous to target arms, faced fighters that laid their arms across their heads to protect them from wraps. When the visiting knight struck the fighter’s head guarding arm repeatedly the fighter stopped the fight and proceeded to explain to the knight that he was unchivalrously hitting his arm. The visiting knight said, “Well I was aiming for your head. I must confess I’m having a hard time reaching it through your arm but I’m going to keep trying till I get my targeting down.â€Â

[dukelogan]

wow...... i intended for this topic to be a discussion of ideas not an exercise in playing a bunch of what ifs. what i said, i thought very clearly, was if a guy head-butted a shield. honestly colin are you trying to argue with me but having to resort to making things up that i didnt say? i know it happens from time to time but this is really a little silly.

and your opinion that turning your helmet to a spear being horrifically unsafe might have some merit to it if you would simply stay on topic and not bring additional, non-relevant, what-ifs into the discussion. i agree that driving my helmet into a guys chest might be unsafe (if hes not wearing any armor) but the question had nothing to do with that. driving your helmet into someones shield does.

logan

and im curious, if a person choose to "head-butt" someones shield why on earth would you stop a fight? not my style mind you but we cant go around stopping fights based on our preferences. sure, if a guy torpedo dives head first into a shield wall it might be worth keeping an eye on him to see if he is mentally stable or not. but automatically stopping a fight because something might could be maybe dangerous?

Helmets are inspected to ensure the safety of the person wearing it not as a weapon. Turning your helmet into a spear is just a bad idea and horrifically unsafe. Understanding that you would rather belly bump someone rather than run into them with your shield I'd sure hope you'd rather hit them with your shield then with the point of your helm. If you commit to a charge and lower your head you probably won't see how things changed on the field causing you to accidentally spear someone in the chest when their shield got jostled and moved in the chaos.

Colin G

[Koredono]

sheild on body contact is perfectly legal koredono. unless that has been changed suddenly. could you please cite the rule that states that supports your claim:
all body to shield contact initiated by the 'shield' is illegal, under all circumstances

Marshal's Handbook, IV.D -

A shield may be used to displace, deflect, or immobilize an opponent’s shield or weapon, so long as such use does not endanger the safety of the combatants. Deliberately striking an opponent’s head, limbs, or body with a shield is forbidden, unless that shield is designed for use as a weapon, and is approved by the Kingdom Marshallate

My interpretation has always been, that since shield and weapon are mentioning explicitly as being legal, and body is not, that similar contact and control by the shield on the body is not legal. While I don't have access to older MHBs at the moment, this rule has been in place at least 5 years (Nov 2000 edition of the MHB), so it's not a sudden or recent change.

and i'm curious, if a person choose to "head-butt" someones shield why on earth would you stop a fight? not my style mind you but we cant go around stopping fights based on our preferences. sure, if a guy torpedo dives head first into a shield wall it might be worth keeping an eye on him to see if he is mentally stable or not. but automatically stopping a fight because something might could be maybe dangerous?

According to the Society Combat Authorizations Procedures, 7.b - Does the authorizing fighter exhibit safe behavior on the field, both for him/ herself and for others?, this is as important as any other aspect for determing whether someone should be allowed on the field; under a number of circumstances, I could easily see where headbutting a shield could be seen as pretty actively not exhibiting safe behaviour on the field to him/herslef, not to mention that since such a combattant is probably not really watching where they're going, and could easily become a danger to others on the field (by, say, unintentionally headbutting someone in the sternum or some other body part), and as such could probably be deserving of losing their authorization on the spot.

Again, it depends on context: if they're on, say, a bridge, and pusing with their body against a shield, and their head comes in contact so they're pushing with their head as well, that's probably all right, but if they're taking a running charge like a bull at an opposing shieldman, that's not all right.

not sure im willing to make that determination.

Yet, it's the job of the marshals to do make such determinations, to keep it relatively safe for all participants. So whether I would want to make such a call or not, if I'm the marshal, it's my responsibility.

poor footwear accounts for far more injuries than does head to sheild contact yet we dont stop guys with bad shoes from fighting.

If you mean 'footwear that helps to prevent combat-related injuries', not 'so-and-so should be wearing orthopedic shoes', sure we do - the line about 'sturdy footwear' prevents people from fighting in sandals, for example, let alone barefoot. And I am personally unaware of anyone who has had a foot injury in a combat-related sense that would have been prevented by anything short of steel-toed boots, which I don't think we're going to start requiring any time soon.

[Koredono]

Koredono,

Actually, the attitude in the West varies. Some things come up as customs in certain areas, and become "traditions" for some of the fighters, and not for others. The main one that comes to mind is the practice of not taking arms. Some fighters in the West hold that as a tradition, others (including myself) do not.

That's certainly the most famous one, though not one of the ones I was thinking about (face thrusts was the predominant one in my mind, actually, mostly because I've been involved in a number of discussions about tht recently).

The point which we're discussing is another of those, although I believe that my opinion is held by a very sizeable majority - probably almost all of the fighters.

Good to know; not that I come across many Western fighters (a few each at Gulf Wars and Pennsic, and the odd transplant) for it to be relevant very often, but it's another point for in my interest in interkingdom anthropology.

As we've agreed, though. the rules allow various interpretations.

Paulb

Exactly. And, to be honest, if the rules were changed to more reflect your interpretation, I'm not sure I'd have a problem with it; until that happens, or the rules are clarified, I'll be forced to interpret them, and most often in the way that is most commonly accepted (possibly even 'traditional') in my region.

[ColinG]

ummmm.... ok, did you mean to respond to someone elses post colin? you didnt address anything i said. i mean, it is illegal in atlantia (for the time being) to make any body to body contact with someone. its illegal to strike someone with a sheild. so my point was that if a fighter fights with say a spear over his head (which ive done a number of times to shoot over other targets) he is, by the rules in atlantia, invulnerable to a charge.

i dont know, maybe i wasnt clear.

It appears that perhaps I was the one unclear. Both the story I presented and the holding your spear above your head in surrender are examples of violating the rule that was pointed out:

"Any behavior that takes deliberate advantage of an opponent’s chivalry or safety-consciousness, or that takes deliberate unfair advantage of an opponent, is prohibited."

That's a clear as I can make it.

[ColinG]

wow...... i intended for this topic to be a discussion of ideas not an exercise in playing a bunch of what ifs. what i said, i thought very clearly, was if a guy head-butted a shield...and your opinion that turning your helmet to a spear being horrifically unsafe might have some merit to it if you would simply stay on topic and not bring additional, non-relevant, what-ifs into the discussion.

Oh, I was clearly responding to this specific comment of yours.

if a guy torpedo dives head first into a shield wall it might be worth keeping an eye on him to see if he is mentally stable or not. but automatically stopping a fight because something might could be maybe dangerous?

Clearly marshals can't wait until someone's helmet spears someone sternum before they make the determination that there is an unsafe act. Does that make all head down charges clearly unsafe? No, but unsafe has always been a bit like obsenity, "I'll know it when I see it." This of course makes it somewhat subjective and why marshals generally exhibit restraint in intervening in such cases. The hard part is in training fighters to walk the line between safe and unsafe, fun and dangerous. The rules simply help us as trainers explain what acceptable. As chivalry, we owe it to our students to teach them to operate both within the SPIRIT of the rule and the LETTER of the rule. I understand if you disagree (and I'm not sure if you do or not) but that's this man's/marshal's/knight's opinion.

honestly colin are you trying to argue with me but having to resort to making things up that i didnt say? i know it happens from time to time but this is really a little silly.

Again, you asked how it could be dangerous. I provided a reasonable example of why you shouldn't allow the torpedo dive you described. Surely we can agree that stopping people from using their heads as missiles is a good idea???

Regards,
Colin G

[dukelogan]

contact is not striking koredono. you can make contact with a persons body and then shove them out of the way with your shield. the sem even addressed that specifically not to long ago. not sure why there is confusion between striking and contact.

regards
logan

sheild on body contact is perfectly legal koredono. unless that has been changed suddenly. could you please cite the rule that states that supports your claim:
all body to shield contact initiated by the 'shield' is illegal, under all circumstances

Marshal's Handbook, IV.D -

A shield may be used to displace, deflect, or immobilize an opponent’s shield or weapon, so long as such use does not endanger the safety of the combatants. Deliberately striking an opponent’s head, limbs, or body with a shield is forbidden, unless that shield is designed for use as a weapon, and is approved by the Kingdom Marshallate

My interpretation has always been, that since shield and weapon are mentioning explicitly as being legal, and body is not, that similar contact and control by the shield on the body is not legal. While I don't have access to older MHBs at the moment, this rule has been in place at least 5 years (Nov 2000 edition of the MHB), so it's not a sudden or recent change.

[dukelogan]

ok, let me try this then. if a spear fighter was holding his spear above his head trying to hit over something like a shieldman on his knees how would you charge him here since it is not legal to strike him with your shield and now you cant even touch him with your body? he certainly isnt taking any advantage of anyone chivalry (i think they actually mean courtesy) or saftey-mindedness. so, it seems, they are invulnarable to a charge.

regards
logan

ummmm.... ok, did you mean to respond to someone elses post colin? you didnt address anything i said. i mean, it is illegal in atlantia (for the time being) to make any body to body contact with someone. its illegal to strike someone with a sheild. so my point was that if a fighter fights with say a spear over his head (which ive done a number of times to shoot over other targets) he is, by the rules in atlantia, invulnerable to a charge.

i dont know, maybe i wasnt clear.

It appears that perhaps I was the one unclear. Both the story I presented and the holding your spear above your head in surrender are examples of violating the rule that was pointed out:

"Any behavior that takes deliberate advantage of an opponent’s chivalry or safety-consciousness, or that takes deliberate unfair advantage of an opponent, is prohibited."

That's a clear as I can make it.