Motivation-Response Unit in Scene vs. Sequel

Status
Not open for further replies.

zornhau

Swordsman
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
167
Location
Scotland
Website
www.livejournal.com
Writing Again said:
I think Ranulph's duel shows what I mean: The attacker discovers he has already been blocked, (The hanging parry was probably slid into as a reaction without thought) in what appears on the surface to be an out of sequence move -- i.e. he did not take turn.
Phew! You more or less got it*, which is enough for me. As long as it passes for marital arts before the scrutiny of a martial artist, then the Emperor has clothes!
:Trophy:
Thanks for your comments, which have made me reassess how I write combat scenes.

*Actually, though, Ranulph always intended the hanging parry. He feinted a diagonal cut to get a reaction, turned it into an across-the-body cut, which landed under Sir L's blade as a parry which turned into a cut which landed short but opened up the possibility of a thrust. (In German longsword terminology:feinted a zornhau, set-aside with a kurtzhau then thrust from Ox - Ranulph is a tricky fellow!). But who cares?
 

Writing Again

Living Life In The Sandbox
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
153
Reaction score
10
Mistook said:
I'd say Adrianne knows this Rifkin guy from high school, and knows that while he is holding the gun, he believes he's won the confrontation, especially since (we can infer) her hands are going up. He doen't realize it's possible for her to disarm him, but the move she uses is one that might be familiar to fans of the martial arts.

:)

One of the things untrained fighters don't realize is that holding a weapon, be it knife, gun, or club, is that having a weapon does NOT make the person a better fighter.

Most untrained fighters believe that once they hold the weapon they have won the fight. Few realise that a highly trained martial artist can disarm an untrained gun wielder from twenty-one foot away. Police know it, which is why, once they have a drawn gun they are ready to shoot if the perp so much as flinches wrong.

Of course it works the other way as well. Untrained fighters facing either a weapon or someone who looks bigger, stronger, or meaner, may suffer psychological defeat when in truth they could have won easily with a quick snap kick to the knee.

On the other hand a lot of martial artists have learned techniques for disarming a gun wielder that do not work in real life. Slamming the back of the hand holding the gun can actually discharge the gun into the defender's chest with little or no escape possible ... Even though the person holding the gun did not intend to shoot.

You have no control over what the reader knows, worse you have know control over what the reader thinks they know: I myself was a brown belt in competition Judo when I came across a guy with a far lower rank than my own who was very difficult to throw. His instructor had taught him to block my hips -- Not my throw. The reason I was not taught this simple thing was my instructor wanted to keep this info as his "edge" against his students, while the other guy's instructor spent less time teaching his students to throw and more time teaching them to not be thrown, "You can always hit, kick, bite, and scratch if you are still standing up" he told his students, "but once you are on the ground there is not much you can do." (BTW students of ground arts, especially Brazilian will chuckle at the last line, because on the ground is where they want to take you.)

You have to include enough detail that the reader can draw their own pictures based on what they believe to be true, never so much detail to contradict what they think they know,

I believe MRU's would create fight scenes that would be believable for most people. If the two combatants were portrayed as competent, but far from expert, it would work for me. People learning fighting skills spend a long time in the "He swings, I duck and hit back, then he blocks and swings again" mentality, it just doesn't work at the pro boxer, pro wrestler, black belt, or championship swordsman level.
 

zornhau

Swordsman
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
167
Location
Scotland
Website
www.livejournal.com
So, in a nutshell: choreograph an authentic fight scene, then stand just far enough back not to bore or confuse the non-martial arts reader.

This rather puts martial artists in the same position as gays a generation back: reading between the lines for their own experience!
 

Writing Again

Living Life In The Sandbox
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
153
Reaction score
10
zornhau said:
*Actually, though, Ranulph always intended the hanging parry. He feinted a diagonal cut to get a reaction, turned it into an across-the-body cut, which landed under Sir L's blade as a parry which turned into a cut which landed short but opened up the possibility of a thrust. (In German longsword terminology:feinted a zornhau, set-aside with a kurtzhau then thrust from Ox - Ranulph is a tricky fellow!). But who cares?

I believe you could work that into the fight scene -- Possibly as MRU's -- and make the fight not only more believable, but add tension and stretch out the suspense. However it looks as though you are writing 3rd person objective, I prefer 3rd omniscient (although I usually stick to one one pov.)

Example:

Sir Lionel had improved, but how much? Ranulph launched his body forward but did not commit his arm to the full swing. If Sir Lionel had not improved, and did not react, then Ranulph would have missed a quick win and be leaving himself vulnerable to a lesser fighter: No telling what would happen next -- Or if Sir Lionel had become extremely good and seen through the ruse -- though Ranulph doubted he could have improved that much in so a short time. In any case it was too late now to change tactics.

Note: A reader untrained in fighting would wonder what was going on, and you would explain it later, raising questions is good, while a trained fighter would realize a feint of some kind was happening. A feint is believable because one part or another of the body is committed to the false attack, at least for a second. The attack itself is ineffective because other parts of the body are either committed to, or ready to be committed to, the follow up attack.

I don't use feints much myself, they require as much time, training, and skill as a real technique, and have a greater chance of working against you. Some arts, boxing comes to mind, use them extensively. A skilled fighter knows, feint or not, the second blow is coming and prepares for it accordingly. Some styles, such as Aikido, know feint or not, the blow is going to be withdrawn sooner or later regardless of the commitment, (otherwise the attacker would fall on their face of their own accord) and relies upon the sensitivity of the practitioner to either extend the motion forward, continue its reversal, or alter its direction up, down, or sidewise. Therefore a skilled Aikidoist can treat a feint as though it were a real blow.
 

Writing Again

Living Life In The Sandbox
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
153
Reaction score
10
zornhau said:
So, in a nutshell: choreograph an authentic fight scene, then stand just far enough back not to bore or confuse the non-martial arts reader.

This rather puts martial artists in the same position as gays a generation back: reading between the lines for their own experience!

So funny, but so true.
 

zornhau

Swordsman
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
167
Location
Scotland
Website
www.livejournal.com
Indeed:
I remember being ecstatic to find hand parries, halfsword and certain wrestling moves in Edgard Rice Burroughs's Mars series. He was one of us!
 

Anatole Ghio

Ironic Paranormal
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
205
Reaction score
15
zornhau said:
Some of that detail could probably go into the text! It would also work fine as a a couple of terse MRUs.

I can never quite decide how much martial arts detail readers want. I've been discussing this with my friends off- and on-line (http://www.livejournal.com/users/zornhau/11948.html). Perhaps we should start a thread on the subject once this one's played out.

For the most part, going into too much detail in a fight scene will only slow down the story. Unlike film where many actions can be conveyed in a short time, in print many actions can usually only be conveyed in a large space. It can become hard to convey every little action in a fight without seeming to be overlong.

There are exceptions, of course. The best part of writing is in being able to jump into a characters head and convey emotional nuance. With this invaluable tool, you won't need to convey so much physical detail... so the trade off for losing some of the fight description is in being able to convey how the character feels in the writing.

- Anatole
 

zornhau

Swordsman
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
167
Location
Scotland
Website
www.livejournal.com
I tend to agree with you - hence my make it authentic but from a distance thing.

However, it does depend on your genre or sub genre. Military SF positively requires you to gloat over all the details.

Also, some of the combat details do have an emotional significance - remember Dirty Harry's Magnum speech?
 
Last edited:

Mistook

Neverending WIP
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
882
Reaction score
65
Location
Aurora, Illinois.
Website
www.myspace.com
This conversation about the fight moves is invaluable to somebody like me. I couldn't fight my way out of a paper bag, but I'm going to write a few fairly involved scenes as the WIP goes forward.

Adrianne's going to find herself in later chapters being hunted down by a male bounty hunter who is twice her weight and a foot taller. I intend to choreograph three fights. The first two push her to her absolute limits, but she manages to get away. The last one she finally loses and gets captured.
 

Writing Again

Living Life In The Sandbox
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
153
Reaction score
10
Well, Mr. Mistook, remember that knowing how to fight is not what wins fights -- What wins fights is the mind. Kenny Rogers said it best when he described poker: "You gotta know when to hold em, when to fold em, when to walk away, and when to run." Convincing someone you are drawing to an inside straight when you have four of a kind -- Convincing someone you have a full house when you don't even have a pair -- That will win you more fights than years of study and practice.

Trickery and deception are everything.

My favorite fight scene is when James Garner runs away from the bad guy and into the bathroom: Once there he dumps liquid soap onto the floor. In comes the bad guy. The bad guy throws a hard kick at Garner. The bad guy slips on the soap, falls on his backside.

As he leaves Garner says something to the effect of, "The problem with that stuff is it only works if you play by the rules."

Never play by the rules.
 

Writing Again

Living Life In The Sandbox
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
153
Reaction score
10
zornhau said:
I tend to agree with you - hence my make it authentic but from a distance thing.

However, it does depend on your genre or sub genre. Military SF positively requires you to gloat over all the details.

Also, some of the combat details do have an emotional significance - remember Dirty Harry's Magnum speech?

Know your reader!
 

Mistook

Neverending WIP
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
882
Reaction score
65
Location
Aurora, Illinois.
Website
www.myspace.com
Writing Again said:
Well, Mr. Mistook, remember that knowing how to fight is not what wins fights -- What wins fights is the mind. Kenny Rogers said it best when he described poker: "You gotta know when to hold em, when to fold em, when to walk away, and when to run." Convincing someone you are drawing to an inside straight when you have four of a kind -- Convincing someone you have a full house when you don't even have a pair -- That will win you more fights than years of study and practice.

Trickery and deception are everything.

My favorite fight scene is when James Garner runs away from the bad guy and into the bathroom: Once there he dumps liquid soap onto the floor. In comes the bad guy. The bad guy throws a hard kick at Garner. The bad guy slips on the soap, falls on his backside.

As he leaves Garner says something to the effect of, "The problem with that stuff is it only works if you play by the rules."

Never play by the rules.


That is a great insight. I'll keep it in mind. The Bugs Bunny strategy. :)
 

zornhau

Swordsman
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
167
Location
Scotland
Website
www.livejournal.com
Mistook said:
This conversation about the fight moves is invaluable to somebody like me. I couldn't fight my way out of a paper bag, but I'm going to write a few fairly involved scenes as the WIP goes forward.

Adrianne's going to find herself in later chapters being hunted down by a male bounty hunter who is twice her weight and a foot taller. I intend to choreograph three fights. The first two push her to her absolute limits, but she manages to get away. The last one she finally loses and gets captured.

IMHO - speaking as somebody fresh out of the shower from coaching German Longsword, a martial art - the main thing is to avoid always stepping outside the system for a win if your character is supposed to be able to fight.

For example, Guy Gavriel Kay ends a fight between his two heroes with one throwing dirt in the other's face - a dead give away that the author has no idea of which end of a sword goes where.

Worse is to misread the combat styles which go with the weapons: Simon R Green's swordspeople spend most of their time stamping(!) and lunging, whatever the weapons. Robin Hobb has Fitz armed with an axe because of his berserker mentality - this is a very hard weapon to use and stay alive with unless you're in a team.

If you're not a martial arts person, perhaps the trick is to adopt one of the following strategies:
  • Keep the fights very short - a three blow exchange, concentrating on the risk management and deception
  • Have long fights, but keep them vague until the finish, which should be a three blow exchange
Even so, you need to interorgate martial arts friends, or read some manuals. Better yet, get off that chair and go take a class!
 

azbikergirl

I really do look like this.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
886
Reaction score
71
Location
not in AZ anymore...
Website
fantasyauthor.blogspot.com
I've got a swordfight scene that concerns me, esp. after your comments above. What I want is for my hero to be badly injured because of his opponent's deception and Hero's inclination to trust the word of another man (without making him seem gullible and/or stupid).

Currently, I'm showing a vague fight between two evenly matched fighters. They grow tired before either gets in a fight-ending strike. The Bad Guy steps back and asks for a short respite. Hero, being the honorable guy (and tired himself) agrees, but without lowering his weapon. Behind them, Hero's sidekick is fighting her heart out with the BG's sidekick, and Hero can't help himself. He has to look. BG darts in, Hero hears the movement and turns, BG throws dirt in his eyes. Hero tries to lunge but can't see, misses. Now blind, he takes BG's sword in the chest. BG, being stupid, thinks he has won and stands there taunting the blind, wounded hero (unaware that Hero has some magic powers and is healing and gaining his strength back every second). Hero's sidekick ends up doing BG in.

As an obviously skilled weapons fighter, can you make any suggestions that would lend more realism to this scene? I studied martial arts for 4 years (and boxing for a year), but only took one short knife class and no sword instruction.

This prob'ly deserves its own thread, but WTH. :)
 
Last edited:

zornhau

Swordsman
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
167
Location
Scotland
Website
www.livejournal.com
azbikergirl said:
I've got a swordfight scene that concerns me, esp. after your comments above. What I want is for my hero to be badly injured because of his opponent's deception and Hero's inclination to trust the word of another man (without making him seem gullible and/or stupid).

Currently, I'm showing a vague fight between two evenly matched fighters. They grow tired before either gets in a fight-ending strike. The Bad Guy steps back and asks for a short respite. Hero, being the honorable guy (and tired himself) agrees, but without lowering his weapon. Behind them, Hero's sidekick is fighting her heart out with the BG's sidekick, and Hero can't help himself. He has to look. BG darts in, Hero hears the movement and turns, BG throws dirt in his eyes. Hero tries to lunge but can't see, misses. Now blind, he takes BG's sword in the chest. BG, being stupid, thinks he has won and stands there taunting the blind, wounded hero (unaware that Hero has some magic powers and is healing and gaining his strength back every second). Hero's sidekick ends up doing BG in.

As an obviously skilled weapons fighter, can you make any suggestions that would lend more realism to this scene? I studied martial arts for 4 years (and boxing for a year), but only took one short knife class and no sword instruction.

This prob'ly deserves its own thread, but WTH. :)

More knowledgable than skilled, but yes - glad to help. What weapons? What armour? What kind of period feel?
 

azbikergirl

I really do look like this.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
886
Reaction score
71
Location
not in AZ anymore...
Website
fantasyauthor.blogspot.com
Hero has a bastard sword that he mostly uses one-handed, BG uses a short sword. Hero is too poor to afford real armor, so he wears a leather cuirass. BG has a mail shirt. The period of the story is sort of a mix. 1600-1700 is probably closest overall feel. Thanks!!
 

Writing Again

Living Life In The Sandbox
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
153
Reaction score
10
zornhau said:
IMHO - speaking as somebody fresh out of the shower from coaching German Longsword, a martial art - the main thing is to avoid always stepping outside the system for a win if your character is supposed to be able to fight.

For example, Guy Gavriel Kay ends a fight between his two heroes with one throwing dirt in the other's face - a dead give away that the author has no idea of which end of a sword goes where.

Worse is to misread the combat styles which go with the weapons: Simon R Green's swordspeople spend most of their time stamping(!) and lunging, whatever the weapons. Robin Hobb has Fitz armed with an axe because of his berserker mentality - this is a very hard weapon to use and stay alive with unless you're in a team.

If you're not a martial arts person, perhaps the trick is to adopt one of the following strategies:
  • Keep the fights very short - a three blow exchange, concentrating on the risk management and deception
  • Have long fights, but keep them vague until the finish, which should be a three blow exchange
Even so, you need to interorgate martial arts friends, or read some manuals. Better yet, get off that chair and go take a class!

I think this is part of it. I have never yet, (Not saying it won't happen, cuz it could) had a hero who knows how to fight. Usually the bad guys do not know much either.

I do not like the image "all karate people, weight lifters, gun lovers etc are crazy people ready to explode" that some movies and stories tend to portray. There may be some nutcase martial artists, weight lifters, gun lovers out there, but they are few and far between. So I avoid making the bad guys experts.

On the other hand the average person is not an expert either...They are just a person who suddenly got in over their head.

One WIP has heroes who are out of their depth in worlds they do not understand. The people in those worlds use weapons as a matter of course, it is what everyone in those worlds do. The ones that cause the most problems for my poor heroes are not especially skilled, but they are soldiers and there are a lot of them.

The other concerns a rather small girl who has no idea how to fight, yet in the end she defeats a monster that tries to crush her too death.

BTW Zornhau discusses German Longsword. The European style of fighting, ideals of honor, philosophy, beliefs, are far removed from the Eastern styles and concepts.

To begin with a European would draw his sword and let his opponant draw his -- Then they would cross blades and begin. To do otherwise would be considered cowardly. The Samuri's object was to draw his sword and cut the head from his opponant before the opponant had time to draw -- Much like a gun fight in the old west.

When writing a fantasy you might pause and think, "What is the attitude toward the weapon? Toward the opponant? What is honor in this culture? What is a deadly insult?"

In one culture taking advantage of an opportunity to kill a defensless opponant is considered cowardly -- In another to give your opponant an opportunity to kill you is a deadly insult which implies he is too unskilled to take advantage of the opportunity.

You are not just dealing with skill and combat and weapons, you are also dealing with a culture -- In a fantasy it not only may be different than ours, it probably should be.
 

zornhau

Swordsman
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
167
Location
Scotland
Website
www.livejournal.com
Agree with Writing Again's general remarks about cultural aspects of weapons and fighting.

azbikergirl said:
Hero has a bastard sword that he mostly uses one-handed, BG uses a short sword. Hero is too poor to afford real armor, so he wears a leather cuirass. BG has a mail shirt. The period of the story is sort of a mix. 1600-1700 is probably closest overall feel. Thanks!!

OK, here's my best guess as to how it would work out. Please bear in mind that other martial artists/swordsmen may disagree, and that your local SCA bods - who I earnestly encourage you to chat to - would probably suggest something different (though they are welcome to come to Scotland to try it man-to-man).

If they're evenly matched, in the actual fight hero would concentrate on using his longer reach by:
  • Thrusting: Stabbing BG in exposed face. He could also try for legs and thighs, but you can't go for these without losing reach (think of the geometry- try it with broomhandles!). A good thrust with the body behind it should penetrate mail, but no guarantees, and he'd have to get BG's sword out of the way first.
    NB General rule of fencing is that the poitn always lands first.
  • Cutting to the hands/wrists: Either by stepping away from BG's attacks then cutting at his wrists, or tempting him to attack and actually parrying against the wrist (in modern fencing, this is a stop cut. In German LS, cutting off)! Sword unlikely to cut mail in one blow, but will shatter bones, deaden hand.
BG would have to overcome lack of reach (assuming no shield here):
  • Beating Hero's blade out the way then springing in with a cut or thrust
  • Binding against Hero's blade (i.e. pressing blade to blade), then pivotting in and grabbing the wrist with the left hand - a sword capture.
All exhausting stuff! So, when they do back off by mutual consent before things become random, that's quite reasonable. Then the hero's distracted as you describe and the BG does something evil which is only foiled by hero's regen. powers.

This could be:
  1. Hero is resting, so holds his sword on his shoulder like a baseball bat.
  2. Hero distracted.
  3. Villain lunges, impales hero
At this point, you have two options:

Option 1. Sidekick kills BG (as per original)
  1. BG recovers from lunge, i.e. withdraws to a safe distance
  2. Hero is dying, and his muscles have locked up. So villain gloats.
  3. At this point Sidekick gets him
Option 2. Hero gets BG
2.1 Assumes BG isn't used to fighting an old-fashioned bastard sword, and that you don't mind a level of nastiness in your story.
  1. Sword still sticking in Hero, BG pivots closer grabs Hero's left wrist, immobilising Hero's sword.
  2. Almost close enough to kiss, he taunts dying hero.
  3. Hero unclasps his left hand and punches with the right. Since he's still holding his bastard sword, this drives the crossguard into the BG's face, eyes, or throat
  4. BG either: falls dead; or falls back dying from a throat wound, in which case his last sight would be the Hero regenerating.
2.2 More sanitised. Assumes BG knows what he's doing.
  1. Sword still sticking in Hero, BG pivots closer grabs the pommel or ricasso of Hero's sword, utterly immobilising it.
  2. Almost close enough to kiss, he taunts dying hero.
  3. Sidekick stabs BG in back.
Hope this helps.

If you're trying for a particular period feel, then you'd do well to look at http://www.ospreypublishing.com/ since they're books will pretty much tell you what you need to know about weapons and equipment.
 

azbikergirl

I really do look like this.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
886
Reaction score
71
Location
not in AZ anymore...
Website
fantasyauthor.blogspot.com
Z, thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!!!!

This helps tremendously. I have a book on Medieval Swords and Swordmanship in which the author looks down his nose at SCA guys and their "inauthentic" swordplay, which is why I did not seek out any of the local groups. I used mostly drawings and description from that book to choreograph my scene (in a vague sort of way). However, your suggestions help me see how both guys would approach the fight -- something the book did not do.

It may not matter much, but my hero is a lefty. I want the sidekick to do in BG because I want to show how she is completely unscathed from her fight (not even a bruise), while he gets totally beat up and stabbed. (She has a magical advantage she's unaware of.) This becomes significant later.

I can't wait to go revise this scene with the help you've given me. Thanks again!!
 

zornhau

Swordsman
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
167
Location
Scotland
Website
www.livejournal.com
azbikergirl said:
Z, thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!!!!
This helps tremendously. I have a book on Medieval Swords and Swordmanship in which the author looks down his nose at SCA guys

Glad I could help! The SCA tend to know more about fighting SCA style than real combat, however you'd get some sort of versimultude by talking with them - which is all you really need. Also, some of them will really will know their stuff, or at least have 'real' weapons you can handle.

The best book on medieval longsword is Windsor, The Swordsman's Companion http://www.chivalrybookshelf.com/ which has some good overview of body mechanics and the basics, before getting onto specifics. The same publisher also does good books on Sword and Buckler, and German Longsword.

As for the book you have - beware of anybody who insists parries are done with the flat.

I think we're about as far OT as it's possible now! If you need any further cold steel help, please feel free to drop me a private message or start a new thread.:)
 

Liam Jackson

Heathen Horde Elder
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
6,854
Reaction score
622
Regarding the MRU issue- What James Ritchie said.

Regarding the sword/system/combat discussion-
Add-on to the remarks concerning parry. I can understand, and have used flat parries, depending on the cicumstance. For instance, if I need a prisoner more than I need a body-count, I might parry low on the blade to open up the opponents stance, then step inside to nullify his weapon and use a "less-lethal" counter. (Don't you just love that term, "less-lethal'?)

(No, I'm not an SCA player, although I've met a couple of those guys who are techncially sound) I can also tell you that flat (slap) parries run a hellacious risk of fracturing the steel of tempered blades. Been there, done that, got the broken tachi to show for it.) Edge on edge is safer. Edge on flesh is optimum. :)

Furthermore, I'm not all convinced that modern efforts to portray open combat are in any way accurate. (Duels, on the other hand, were highly stylized events and do not accurately battlefield conditions.)

Yes, we have tons of period text from which we derive our understanding of single and group combat. However, I think few disagree that many of those texts were written by academics, or others who deliberately attemtped to romanticize combat. I DO know this...in combat, style and convention quickly surrender to "do what works." Many of our textbook teachings may give thanks to unconvential techniques born on the field of battle. Thus, the evolution of individual (battlefield) combat was in ever in flux, and many times, based on second, third, or fourth-hand accounts.

Warriors of the day (and even now) were renown (or dead) for their abilities (or lack thereof) to adapt to meet a given situation. These same warriors produced the "prinicple vs. techinque" mindset. While trying to give a fight scene an element of period flavor, it's reasonable to rely on texbook examples, but remember, there were no paint-by-numbers system of individual fighting on the battlefield. Certain "principles" were likely adhered to, but that's probably as close as one can get to stylized combat. (unlike most duels)

Just my two bits. (allowing for inflation.)
 
Last edited:

zornhau

Swordsman
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
167
Location
Scotland
Website
www.livejournal.com
Yes, battles would be a bit different. For a start, the ground might well be rough, the numbers uneven, and the weapons mixed. Also, you wouldn't have time to exchange more than a couple of blows per encounter.

I've yet to find a good contemp. description of small unit tactics, or ways to survive a melee. The medieval manuals I use all cover 1-1 or, rarely, 1-2.

That said, the general principles of the weapons would still apply. This is certainly true of the techniques of German Longsword, which are implicit in the weapons themselves. A good cut is a good cut in any circumstance, and so on.
 

Mistook

Neverending WIP
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
882
Reaction score
65
Location
Aurora, Illinois.
Website
www.myspace.com
This may be a long-winded metaphore, but I'm good at installing wires, so last weekend my girlfriend's aunt needs a phone extention run from the kitchen to a bedroom. Not a problem, but after traveling 60 miles, I'd forgotten my tools.

Scaring up what was handy, and using my teeth at one point to strip some wires, I managed to do a fairly professional job - better I suspect than a novice with the proper tools might have done.

In other words, if you know the underlying principles, you'll be able to catch as catch can.
 

Liam Jackson

Heathen Horde Elder
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
6,854
Reaction score
622
Bravo, Mistook!

RE: Principle vs. Technique- The notion is that if one understands certain fundamental principles, one can adapt/create appropriate techniques on the fly.
 

zornhau

Swordsman
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
167
Location
Scotland
Website
www.livejournal.com
LiamJackson said:
RE: Principle vs. Technique- The notion is that if one understands certain fundamental principles, one can adapt/create appropriate techniques on the fly.

Exactly! This still means that the pro swordsman is more lethal than disorganised amateurs, no matter how much right is one their side etc: http://www.livejournal.com/users/zornhau/15571.html#cutid1

There's a lot of comforting tosh about the experienced swordsman being most at risk from the enthusiastic novice. Can feel a lj essay coming on....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.