Shields

[Keith Ewing]

You wrote: 
>
>At the risk of getting severly pounded by my friends and 
practice-mates, I
>agree with Sir Galen's and Mistress Gunnora's feelings about 
rectangular
>shields.  They are very effective and forgiving but they just never 
LOOK
>right to me.  I don't feel that, with proper practice and training, a 
heater
>(or round for that matter) is any less effective than a square.  I 
train
>mostly at Inman's and with the exception of His Grace Himself can go
>toe-to-toe with all the rectangular shields out there.  I like the 
look and
>feel of my heater and I enjoy the way I have to move to fight with it
>correctly.  
>
>I also agree with HE Jan about protecting and not over-armoring a 
point you
>get hit on all the time.  I am now looking into getting some body and 
leg
>armor but only after I have been established as an "unarmored" 
fighter.  My
>desire for the armor now is so that I can look more "knightly".
>
>I do not mean this to slam rectangular-shield fighters and I do 
express the
>idea that a properly trained fighter can fight with any shield or 
weapon
>style almost equally.   As I said, I just like the "look" of my 
heater.
>
>Yers,
>
>Gunthar
>

Except for some experimentation in my very early career with an oval 
shield, I have always fought with a heater. Some people say that I do 
OK with it. I, too, like the look of a heater. 
There are advantages to a scutem, but I think that they are small, and 
don't outweigh the asthetics of the heater.
I have also noticed a slight disadvantage of a scutem. The bottom front 
corner can more easily be hooked.

Kein