Kingdom Warlord was a Blast
Paul T. Mitchell
pmitchel at flash.net
Mon May 5 06:30:04 PDT 1997
Timothy A. McDaniel wrote:
>
> Sir Burke wrote:
> > This type of tourney works ok when you have a King or Prince to
> > choose the victor from the combatants. However if there is no royal
> > figure to choose the winner the roling snowball tourney is best as
> > there is a winner.
>
> In period, didn't the ladies judge the tourney and choose men (one or
> more) to honor?
>
> Is it off-topic for the Ansteorran list to ask why *in general* there
> has to be one (1) winner in a tourney? I suspect it's often an axiom:
> you may choose to believe it or not, and see what results you get.
> (One of *my* axioms is that *other things being equal* period is
> better, so which would argue against having one winner.)
>
> Of course, I exclude cases such as this where the object of a tourney
> *is* specifically to choose one person: Crown tourney and warlord
> tourneys, as examples.
>
> Daniel de Lincoln
> --
> Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tmcd at crl.com
Certainly not off-topic!
Sir Conor has looked and found no basis in history for non-fighters
judging tournies. Not saying it didn't happen, but he didn't find
it.
For myself, I much prefer to have judged tournies judged by fighters.
I've seen many tournies in which multiple fighters were honored. I
doubt the winner of this coming Sunday's Ladies' Tourney in Elfsea
will get all the prizes I have to give out, either, even though I
expect it to be a standard double-elim format. But I like having
a prize for winning among the rest; it's something that's not
subjective.
- Galen of Bristol
--
Paul T. Mitchell - pmitchel at flash.net
http://www.flash.net/~pmitchel
"When the money keeps rolling in, you don't ask how."
- Tim Rice, _Evita_
More information about the Ansteorra
mailing list