[Ansteorra] Armoring standards

[Sir Lyonel Oliver Grace]

Salut cozyns,

Laszlo dit qe:


Also, I don't want to see kingdoms fractured along such lines. It 
complicates marshalling and fighter preparation for wars and makes 
travelling between kingdoms needlessly complicated.

>My concern is that by simply setting our armoring
>standards to match SCA standards, whatever they are or
>may become, we abdicate our responsiblity for our own
>rules.

Which I think is a good thing. If some goober gets his arm broken in an 
Ansteorran tournament and sues, I think we're better off if we can say our 
rules meet the Society standards. If we add anything to the Society rules, 
we are admitting that we consider those rules inadequate. What then does 
that say we are trying to accomplish by "improving" the armor requirements? 
That we're safer? As Sir Corwin said recently, we hit each other with 
sticks. It's a dangerous hobby. Even with the vambraces, I know dozens of 
fighters who could--if they got the right opening--break a forearm with a 
single-handed weapon. The odds with a polearms are probably greater.

>By doing so, we encourage the SCA Marshallate
>to make the society rules more restrictive, especially
>if all or most kingdoms were to do the same thing.  If
>the Ansteorran Marshals Handbook, says "Ansteorran
>Armoring standards will conform to SCA armoring
>standards" or some such, with no further ammendment,
>then anyone who disagrees with those standards will be
>inclined to take their concern to the Society level
>rather than the kingdom level.

Not true. The new SCA armor standards clarified the requirement for elbow 
protection to specifically state that a shield alone is not adequate 
protection for the elbow. The Atlantians are having fits about that. The new 
rules governing throat protection require padding under aventails, and many 
of us are complaining about that. The rules governing padding of 
demi-gauntlets has also become (no pun intended) heavy handed, prompting 
complaints.

Personally, I think it's easier to change one set of rules than two or 
nineteen.

>If we want to relax
>our armoring standards, I think that discussing and
>deciding those standards point by point is the
>resposible way to do it.  I also think that it will
>help ensure that we have the power to make our own
>decisions about things like vambraces, elbow cops
>behind shields, and other bits of our standards.

I'm sorry, cozyn, but I don't see that you've demonstrated how arguing the 
standards point by point is any more responsible. It invokes more control 
over the standards, yes, and requires greater oversight of the rules as a 
document, greater complexity of marshalling, and more levels of training. I 
don't see how any of these aspects makes this desirable.

lo vostre per vos servir
Meser Lyonel
_________________________________
Dum doceo disco

_________________________________________________________________
Find a local pizza place, music store, museum and more…then map the best 
route!  http://local.live.com?FORM=MGA001