[Ansteorra-rapier] Opinions on mail gauntlet?

Fri Oct 12 15:45:59 PDT 2007

Wow that was quite an active two-three days of
discussion.

First: I understand Dore's point about the rules as
written.  I would ask that the mailed gauntlet rule
not be removed, but be kept as is, and that continued
discussion along the lines of what has happened on
this list continue amongst those that set the rules so
that the rules can continue to be expanded and
contracted as necessary to accomodate both safety and
enjoyable period-play.

(yes, I am an attorney, and I afraid it showed in that
little--or not-so-little--sentence, sorry!)

which brings me to:

The changes I would like to see!

1. The mailed glove (with palm-mail) should not be
considered a "hand," but, rather, an "off-hand
parrying device."  This was suggested, at least in
passing, if not directly, by an earlier commentator. 
A "hand-grab" of the weapon, once the weapon moves,
will disable the hand, but, an "off-hand parrying
devices temporary immobilization" of the weapon, once
the weapon begins to move, is the same as the weapon
sliding back and forth against any other off-hand
parrying device: no damage.
I understand that this is not the current meaning or
interpretation of the rules, I just hope that we can
work toward that end.

Addressing your question below, Dore:
Two opponents "wrestling" or "struggling" for control
of the blade will still result in a hold.  The only
difference will be if the mailed glove grabs the
opponent's weapon, the opponent's weapon can slide
back and forth in the mailed hand without calling a
valid blow or a hold.  But any safety issues can still
be addressed appropriately.
Now, any sliding back and forth in the hand may also
involve some degree of twisting of the blade.  The
more twisting, the greater the chance of danger to the
blade, and to the combatants.  The rules can be
specifically written to allow the marshall to call
hold at any time that that marshall feels safety
requires.
I feel that this rules adjustment actually promotes
both better period-play and greater safety.  If I grab
an opponent's blade under the current rules I have to
hold on for dear life: if that blade slips the
slightest bit, I lose my advantage and my hand.  With
the modified mailed-glove rule, as suggested in this
thread of posts, I don't have to take firm grasp of my
opponent's blade: in fact, I can just circle my
fingers around the blade and keep it well restricted,
without having to grapple for the blade at all.

Cloaks:
Second thing I want to see, we should be able to hurl
our cloaks wherever the heck we want to.  It's a piece
of cloth.  Therefore, I think we should work toward an
understanding of the rules wherein a cloak can be
thrown on an opponent's weapon--or on an opponent's
head, if we so choose.  
Further, we should be able to entangle our opponent's
weapon with our cloak (if we can).  Granted:
entangling two weapons has potential hazards that
rightly lead to a hold being called; so, too, with
entangling a weapon in an opponent's clothing (primary
amongst which in likelihood is tearing the opponent's
armor, resulting armor armor failure).  However, there
is no realistic harm (and by this I mean both degree
of danger and likelihood of danger) in entangling your
opponent's weapon with your cloak.  There are many on
this list and elsewhere who ahve a far greater
understanding of period texts and tactics than I, but
isn't entanglement of your opponent's weapon a primary
aim of cloak period-play?

I also agree with you on the reduced armor standards,
but that is for another day.

Thanks everyone for this great discussion, and I look
forward to seeing how it progresses.

Cathal SilAlmhain
cadet to Don Charles le Cervoisier D'Alsace
            (aka Don Zorcon)

--- James Crouchet <james at crouchet.com> wrote:

> Let me see if I can clear up a couple of things.
> 
> First a few more bits on the rules:
> 
>    1. "Armor as worn" does not negate hand damage on
> a grab. There is no
>       exception to that rule. So no, we cannot game
> our way around it.
>    2. The use of mail gauntlets is always optional.
> You and your
>       opponent must always agree on ALL weapons so
> if you object to
>       gauntlets, tell your opponent.
> 
> 
> Second, It is my job to decide what our rapier rules
> mean. That does not
> mean I get to make them mean whatever I want them to
> mean , nor does it
> mean taking a poll and going with whatever people
> think would be the
> most fun. If it were up to me we would have reduced
> armor standards,
> buckler punches and no restrictions on mixing
> blades. However, I know
> that is not what the rules say and not what was
> intended.
> 
> I have asked the Deputy Society Marshal for Rapier
> (DSMR) for his
> interpretation of this. I have also asked the other
> KRMs for their
> advice. I am interested in what the KRMs have to
> say, but the real
> question here is whether the DSMR believes that the
> armored as worn
> rules can override the hand damage rule on blade
> grabbing. If not than I
> do not have the option of changing this.
> 
> Finally, even if I have the ok from the DSMR, I am
> not convinced there
> is a safe and playable answer to my primary concern
> with this rule: the
> responses of the person who's blade is grabbed.
> Unless we want to make
> having your blade grabbed equal a fatal blow I must
> consider:
> What ways are fighters likely to react to having
> their blades grabbed by
> and uncuttable hand, and are any of those a problem?
> If a fighter manages to grab his opponent's blade as
> Robin suggests --
> what then?
> Are there any safe, effective, legal responses to
> having your blade
> grabbed by someone who's hand cannot be cut?
> 
> If you think this should change then please help me
> address those questions.
> 
> Christian Doré, KRM
> 
> 
> 
> Northern Cadet wrote:
> > Well said Sebastiana.  I'll ad my voice to yours
> here.  The loss of a
> > technique should be a last resort and based on
> safety rather than
> > uncompromising opinions.  If individuals are not
> happy with the usage of the
> > gauntlets then make them optional.  Let the
> fighters decide if they wish to
> > face them or not, case by case / bout by bout. 
> And, in armour as worn
> > tournaments allow the full protection provided by
> the gauntlets as is
> > historically accurate.  Again it's the fighters
> choice to give that
> > advantage to their opponents and should be decided
> before taking the field. 
> >
> > Lord Gassion de Beaumarchais
> > Cadet to Don James Francis Navarre
> > Mooneschadowe Insegnante
> >
> > Control thyself, or be ruled by another...
> >
> >
> >
> > Of course I will follow whatever rule this kingdom
> > decides on, but I feel that an unrealistic rule is
> > exactly that.  I rather not see chainmail banned
> or
> > not used in a realistic way, not only since I do
> have
> > one, but the more period devices we can use, the
> more
> > spice we bring to the art.  Otherwise, we could
> all
> > become strip fencers and be burdened with to many
> > rules that are not of a safety standard.
> >
> > In Service,
> >
> > Lord Sebastiana
> >
> > --- James Crouchet <james at crouchet.com> wrote:
> >
> >   
> >> Given our recent discussions concerning mail
> >> gauntlets, who would rather
> >> this item was just removed from our rules?
> >>
> >> Christian Doré
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Ansteorra-rapier mailing list
> Ansteorra-rapier at lists.ansteorra.org
> >>
> >>     
> >
>
http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-rapier-ansteorra.org
> >   
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> > ________
> > Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV.
> Watch previews, get listings,
> > and more! http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/3658 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ansteorra-rapier mailing list
> Ansteorra-rapier at lists.ansteorra.org
> >
>
http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-rapier-ansteorra.org
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ansteorra-rapier mailing list
> > Ansteorra-rapier at lists.ansteorra.org
> >
>
http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-rapier-ansteorra.org
> >   
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> Ansteorra-rapier mailing list
> Ansteorra-rapier at lists.ansteorra.org
>
http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-rapier-ansteorra.org
> 

      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html