Main > The Courtyard
Quarterstaff and the Armoured Man.
Thorsteinn:
This came up afterwards when me, Unferth, & Count Sir Thjothrekr were talking and Thjo said something like "we know it would not work as well as some would think. We hit each other with quarterstaff like objects all the time in the SCA and we're fine".
That was brought up BTW about how the q-staff guy can do all these throws holds and whatnot to you, and how he can hit with both ends of the staff. Well... if I have a shield then I too can do all kinds of shield bashy, hipthrowy goodness. :D
BTW "There's a reason haute guards are banned in SCA (last I heard)." ???
SCA Marshal here. Where did you hear this & what was the reason behind it?
-Ivan
Joshua Santana:
--- Quote ---Agreed, it's a low percentage chance, but maybe higher than you think. If I were unarmored and had a quarterstaff, against someone in armor, I would go for leverage - not brute force. A quarterstaff is a nice, lengthy lever. Helmet or not, it doesn't take a huge amount of force to snap a neck, especially for a prone opponent - and that's something I hope would never be attempted in recreational context. There's a reason haute guards are banned in SCA (last I heard).
Basically, in SCA context, "quarterstaff guy" has a serious disadvantage and maybe a sliver of hope at best. In "real world" context, when he can trip/throw, ground grapple, and use leverage to try to kill (rather than just score in a system of limited offensive options) - he has a better chance. Not a huge chance by any means, but I still see a bit of potential if he can close cautiously and get into a position of advantage.
--- End quote ---
You make a good point here and I agree with you on the chances a quarter staff fighter would have against an armored opponent.
--- Quote ---his came up afterwards when me, Unferth, & Count Sir Thjothrekr were talking and Thjo said something like "we know it would not work as well as some would think. We hit each other with quarterstaff like objects all the time in the SCA and were fine".
That was brought up BTW about how the q-staff guy can do all these throws holds and whatnot to you, and how he can hit with both ends of the staff. Well... if I have a shield then I too can do all kinds of shield bashy, hipthrowy goodness. :D
BTW "There's a reason haute guards are banned in SCA (last I heard)." ???
SCA Marshal here. Where did you hear this & what was the reason behind it?
--- End quote ---
That is another possibility. I think that if the huate guards are banned in the SCA they would be weaknesses a pole arm fighter would use to his advantage by hooking the guards and pulling him in for the strike. Me personally, i think it is their way of reducing the chances of physical danger/risk during combat.
Sir William:
I think someone truly trained in the quarterstaff could give an armored man a bit of trouble, provided he was quick enough to feint, thrust and move away, side step or rollout a blow, then use the armored man's momentum to take him to the ground and either crush his throat or keep him off his feet at the least until he can be finished, or he yields.
Of course, a solid thrust of a sword from behind a shield could make all of that moot if the qstaff fighter is neither quick or sure-footed.
Sir James A:
--- Quote from: RauttSkegg on 2012-05-08, 17:33:19 ---BTW "There's a reason haute guards are banned in SCA (last I heard)." ???
SCA Marshal here. Where did you hear this & what was the reason behind it?
-Ivan
--- End quote ---
It's a safety liability if someone traps a polearm between another person's neck and the haute guard - one wrong pivot of the polearm and the first point to give way will be soft neck bone, and not the steel haute guard - unless the strap breaks. I wanted a left side haute guard on my armor back for the 1 season I did SCA heavy, and was told I could not because of that. Particularly dangerous for melees where there's weapons flying on all sides. I also heard there are no strikes allowed of more than 180* swing with a great weapon, which you certainly had thrown at you. To make sure we're talking about the same thing, a haute guard is a vertical guard on a pauldron, like here (http://home.messiah.edu/~gdaub/armor/pictures/valentin/maximil.jpg). There might be some variances that says leather ones are allowed, but not steel (since the leather will give easily). I'd actually be a bit surprised if they are legal.
It was somewhere around 15 years ago that I last picked up a stick, and it's east coast, and only at the local fighter practices (I never fought at an event, or got authorized); that may have something to do with it?
Thorsteinn:
--- Quote from: James Anderson III on 2012-05-09, 00:56:20 ---It was somewhere around 15 years ago that I last picked up a stick, and it's east coast, and only at the local fighter practices (I never fought at an event, or got authorized); that may have something to do with it?
--- End quote ---
Yes. I just reviewed the West Kingdom 2011 ACM and found no mention of Haute Guards. I never even remember that being a rule here. Nor can I see how having haute guards is any worse than that leathery bit they wore in the 12th century on the shoulder (alliette?) which is legal.
Society level they are legal but your local kingdom mileage may vary.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version