[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]

Re: PROPOSED for comment

Poster: Michael Houghton <herveus@access.digex.net>

Unto Ricardus filius Gilbertii, Dux, Earl Marshall of Atlantia, and all
others to whom these letters come, from Dominus Herveus d'Ormonde, sometime
herald and poker of hornet's nests, Howdy!

At 1:07 AM -0400 7/30/97, Dan Mackison wrote:
>Poster: Dan Mackison <DanM@skantech.com>
>Despite the Pennsic furor, I am surprised that Duke Richard's request
>for commentary on rule changes for heavy combat in the August Acorn has
>sparked no discussion on the Merry Rose. I have numbered the proposed
>changes for my commentary to follow.
>I quote:
>1) PROPOSED for comment: Fighters may authorize in the various weapon
>forms in any order. While it may usually be a good training technique to
>teach new fighters sword and shield as their first weapons form it is
>not necessary to require that this be their first authorization. This
>change would allow a fighter to authorize in any weapons form as their
>first authorization. This would not change the nature of any
>authorizations just the sequence.

I seem to recall that it used to be this way a few years ago. I support
this change. When this was the case, there were a number of fighters who
authorized in Spear (first and only) for the pleasure of fighting in the
line at Pennsic (or other such opportunities as arose). With the change to
require sword and board as a first form, these people were disenfranchised.
I know people who were unamused by the change. This proposal is a Good
Thing (tm).
>2) PROPOSED for comment: All spears must be nine (9) feet long or less.
>Twelve foot spears do not signigicantly add to our combat experience.
>This rule change would level the playing field by limiting all spears to
>nine feet and protect the investment of those who already have spears
>but don't want to be put at a significant weapons disadvantage.

I don't understand the rationale for this change. Perhaps others closer to
the action can explain it to me, as I don't do the fighting thing. My first
reaction is to wonder why shorten the spears? What are the Society
standards on spears?
>3) PROPOSED for comment: Unpadded polearms be allowed according to SCA
>wide rules. This would allow polearms of up to seven feet long.
>(end quote)
What level of padding is required presently? If "unpadded", what is the
striking surface to be made of? Again, my ignorance of the requirements
trips me up.

I hope these remarks are helpful.

yours in service,

Michael and MJ Houghton   | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
herveus@access.digex.net  | White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA            | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
                          | http://www.access.digex.net/~herveus/

List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org