SyrRhys wrote:[
1.) Eliminate the acting out of blows and simulate the battering effect of powerful strikes with a counted blow system.
Boy, wouldn't that be nice? Some years back, I stopped falling down dead in tournaments (still do it in wars, as it adds to the general ambiance of the battlefield to have dead people strewn about), instead opting to call "well struck!", step out of range, kneel, bow my head and place my sword point-down on the ground. It must signify submission sufficiently, because I never got told to fall down when doing so.
As far as counted blows, if some mechanism could be created that would keep our fights from becoming sniping contests at exposed arms and legs, I'd like that. One of the things that makes counted blow fights at pas d'armes so attractive is that all the combatants come from the SCA tradition of putting their main effort into striking at the head and body-- the blows that end the fight. Once that tradition begins to weaken under a "one down, four more to go" mentality, the fighting might not be as "lethally" directed as it is now.
2.) Institute some *limited* "armor as worn" rules, such as making basket hilts count as a valid target to simulate the use of an unprotected hand (even a mail muffler can't help much--it might protect you from having fingers severed, but it would be enough to cause you to stop fighting, and that will force people to learn to use their crosses correctly), and making thrusts to certain unarmored spots (e.g., bar grills) count as an instant win (and, of course, thrusts to closed-faced visors would only count as a good blow--a "counted" blow--if they were hard enough).
Do you think that this might result in kendo-like hand hunting bouts? Like I said before, one of the good thigs derived from the SCA's current fighting rules is a concentration by combatants on striking at the opponent's head and torso, instead of focusing on sniping at briefly exposed extremities.
3.) Also, allow more extensive target zones by making the shins legal targets: this would have the effect of reducing the value of magical shields to make combat more accurately balanced and would force more people to wear god-damned greaves like God intended.
No greaves in 1150 AD, Rhys! And as splendid as you look on the field in Geoff Charnay's gear, in (SCA) reality, you're wearing Billy Marshal's harness. Seriously, I don't know if this would make much difference. We tried this as an unofficial experiment in the West a long time ago, and found that it was actually kind of hard to hit someone in the lower leg unless you were right on top of him, and then it ususally resulted in a double-leg hit: one for each combatant. Trying for a shin from long range ususally resulted in your opponent moving the leg before your shot landed and riposting, to your detriment. It was too easy to see the shot coming. As far as 1150 AD, there is no rigid protection save for a helmet and a shield, so shields are worn long as a result. Long shield, less shin.
4.) Finally, add some limited grappling into our play. This is the area where our simulation breaks down the most when compared with reality. It needn't be fully-blown throws and locks, just allow limited "holds". When I look at the iconography of sword and shield combat (see below) this is what I see--not hip throws and joint locks, just holds to allow you to hit. This would be perfectly safe and practical if only people could get past their ludicrous modern notion that grappling is somehow unchivalrous.
I'm not convinced that grappling is that big a factor in 1150 AD knightly combat. (I keep bringing up "1150 AD", because that's pretty much the presumed armor for SCA fighting) You see it represented in illuminations, but if it makes up even 20% of the scenes illustrated, I'd be surprised. Grappling is hard when your primary rigid defense is a shield-- you need one hand for the weapon, and one for the shield. To grab at your opponent, you'd have to give up one or the other, and do do either puts you at a sore disadvantage. Shields for the knightly class went away when plate armor became prevelant, which opens up lots of room for cunning WMA grabby-stuff, but not 300 years earlier. I'm also not convinced that you can effectively grapple with someone who is armed and not interested in cooperating with being grappled with, unless you are willing to keep charging in, head down and getting hit a lot as you attempt to close. People with ill intent have been trying to take me to the ground to really kill me for almost 20 years, and so far only one has succeeded, and only briefly. (I was younger then, and not as canny as I am now, in my old age.)
Limiting the size of shields would help too, but you'll always get the folks who can prove larger shields were used in period (ignoring the fact that those shields had drawbacks we can't simulate well).
Since I'm planning on moving to one of those larger shields as part of my move to "the dark side" (as Brian Price tells me I'm doing), what disadvantages? Maybe I need to re-think staying in the 14th Century!
Other than those things I believe much of what we do matches well with what the iconography shows, and I think even the most ardent critics of SCA fighting have been taught that the ubiquitous wrap shop is demonstrably medieval, so that removes almost the only possible criticism.
I agree with you. In fact, I agree with you on most things, Rhys.
Michael
