ANST - A bit on weapons

[Greg Shetler]

Keith Hood wrote:
> 
> Some things you mentioned I can't address. But...
> 
> >
> >3) If we are considered to be wearing open-faced helms, so that we should
> >take any thrust to the face that would have touched the face, why do we
> >just
> >shrug off incidents of our own shield bashing into our face hard enough to
> >rock us?
> >
> 
> Because shields aren't normally made with sharp cutting edges like the
> weapons that knock them into our faces.  <G> Unless you've done something
> REALLY wrong in making your shield, in which case you deserve whatever you
> get.  <G>

That's what I get for being so unclear - thanks for the humor, though.

I meant that our "conceptual" armor being an open-faced helm with nasal,
why do we not do anything about a shield smashing into what conceptually
should be our unprotected mouth, hard enough to rock the real fighter on
his heels?

While I understand that we have a number of rules that "artificialize"
our fighting in order to make it more fun and safer, I've always thought
our tactics would be very different if we *could* take into account to
some degree the _reality_ of a shield, rather than treating them like
D&D armor pieces (unbreakable, never used offensively, and can never be
used against the wielder).

Note: this question is more just to "stir the pot" and see what other
thoughts on our approach to fighting are out there, than as any sort of
complaint....

Dux
============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.