What's changed? was RE: ARCH - History repeat itself
wilim.penbras at pandora.org
Wed Apr 11 12:11:06 PDT 2001
Quite frankly without having been there I can only guees to what might have changed. Population of both heavy fighters and archers coupled with time lapsed since CA started might means we're simply running out the odds. If you have a dozen archers loosing a dozen arrows it's once thing but if you told an odds maker that you were going to have a hundred loosing dozens each for years and then asked the odds of some getting hit, the odds become inevitable.
Were they using arrows like we have now or GT? It's hard to say.
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: baron at elfsea.ansteorra.org
Reply-To: ansteorra-archery at ansteorra.org
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 12:54:27 -0500
>Almost 22 years ago, I fought in my first war. It had
>combat archery, though that was still a novelty at the
>time. I've been active in the SCA ever since. I have
>NOT been seeing these kinds of problems all along. Why
>Combat archery is not new. So what's changed that
>we're beginning to see this sort of problem? It seems
>to me that answering this question should be a
>prerequisite for taking action, lest our action prove
>- Galen of Bristol
>Quoting Sam Milligan <padraig_ruad at irishbard.com>:
>> Willim said (in part):
>> > Not quite, the blunted business end means our
>> > don't stick and with the bounceback we suddenly
>have a new
>> > Business End. I'm sorry but I gaurantee you I can
>put a 1/4
>> > inch shaft, Metal tip or not, through someone.
>> > end WILL and HASdone damage to unarmored bits of
>> > finds in its way.
>> > We can try to eliminate bounce back but that
>> Bounce back is caused because not all of the force of
>an arrow hit is
>> tranferred with the initial hit and the arrow still
>has enough force left
>> to fly off in another direction. Eliminating
>bounceback means transferring
>> the full force of the blow to the object hit. That's
>gonna hurt. To keep
>> it from causing too much pain and bruising then we're
>left with lowering
>> the poundage of our bows. Probably to the point that
>we might as well have
>> a sword and charge the enemy. Not something many of
>us want to do.
>> > Not quite, most of the things a fighter gets
>> > eyes at events are fairly easy to see and we can
>> > their movement. Kind of reduces the risk level.
>If I get
>> > jammed into that tree that's just been standing
>> > it's life then it's at least partially my fault.
>If I get
>> > jammed in the eye by an arrow that came virtually
>out of no
>> > where and hit someone 4 feet away before spiralling
>> > then whose fault is it? Yes, I was distracted and
>> > hadn't been probably could have moved out of the
>way but that
>> > arrow was sent there intentionally, maybe not to
>spin out of
>> > control and hit me but it was certainly sent there
>> > intentionally. Still let's have everyone where
>> > glasses and it'll be a non-issue.
>> > What other options do we have? Let's see, change
>to fix the
>> > problem, PROVE there is no problem, or What? What
>> > do to us? BAN CA at SCA events... okay... I'll
>> > and start on either fixing the problems or finding
>> > there is no problem.
>> Sorry about the massive snippage Willim, but I wanted
>to address some
>> specific points in what you wrote.
>> Speaking as a heavy fighter who is also an authorized
>combat archer, I have
>> to say that I too am concerned with safety issues. I
>want to play the game
>> with the absolute munimum of injuries possible.
>However, I know that every
>> time I armor up and face an opponent or take part in
>a melee, there is a
>> possibility that I am going to get hurt, perhaps
>seriously. By signing the
>> waiver section of the membership application form,
>and then by signing my
>> blue membership card, I acknowledge this.
>> Can we make SCA combat in general safer, so that no
>one ever gets hurt?
>> Almost certainly. But if we do so, most of us will
>simply stop fighting,
>> for there will be no excitement, no adrenaline rush,
>no thrill of combat,
>> no reason to do it at all.
>> Can we make issues like combat archery safer by
>requiring everyone to wear
>> safety glasses? Possibly. Personally, I would
>intensely dislike having to
>> wear safety glasses under my helm, as I sweat heavily
>in armor, and would
>> be more than half blinded by the resulting fog on the
>glasses. I feel this
>> would prove more of a safety issue than the
>possibility of a bounced-back
>> arrow or some other object getting in through my
>> I have been in numerous melees with combat archery,
>and have yet to
>> experience or observe someone injured by the nock end
>of a combat arrow.
>> Doesn't mean it hasn't happened, but I've not seen it
>myself, nor do I know
>> anyone who has spoken of seeing or experiencing such
>> I like having combat archery in melees - it adds a
>dimension of reality to
>> the game (even if it is annoying to get taken out by
>an arrow or a bolt
>> instead of in face-to-face fighting). I don't want
>to see it made so safe
>> that it won't make a difference if it's there or
>not. I don't see that a
>> real problem exists here - let's not fix what's not
>> Just my 2 pence worth.
>> Nunc Est Bibendum
>> Politicians prefer unarmed peasants.
>> Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to
>perform mailing list tasks.
>Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.
More information about the Ansteorra-archery