Posted By mahee_of_acre on 08-30-2006 11:29 PM
Definitions:
Slap Any “cut” that initially strikes with the edge of the blade, then bounces off (i.e., no
draw).
It should say:
Slap Any “cut” that initially strikes with the edge of the blade, then bounces off (i.e., no
draw) or impact with the flat of the blade.
Impact with the flat of a blade is "Flat", which is different than a "Slap"
- - -
1.3.3. No person shall participate in Combat-Related Activities outside of formal training sessions unless he or she shall have been properly authorized under Society and Kingdom procedures.
This rule says that I can not do what I want in my own backyard. An easy correction is to add “List” to the definition section.
Whatever someone does outside of the SCA is their own deal. This document only refers to the SCA.- - -
1.3.4. All combatants must be presented to, and be acceptable to, the Sovereign or his or her representative.
Since there is not a presentation to the Sovereign or representative at all tourneys, this could be corrected as follows:
4. All combatants must be acceptable to, the Sovereign or his or her representative.
Actually, they are. Read the section that says "or his or her representative". That representative is the marshal performing authorizations.
Also, anything in 1.3 CANNOT be changed. These are the Rules of the Lists of the SCA.
- - -
1.3.7. Combatants shall behave in a knightly and chivalrous manner, and shall fight according to the appropriate Society and Kingdom Conventions of Combat.
Unless you define ‘knightly’ as something other than chivalrous, it is redundant. An easy correction would be as follows:
7. Combatants shall behave in a chivalrous manner, and shall fight according to the
appropriate Society and Kingdom Conventions of Combat.
Anything in 1.3 CANNOT be changed. These are the Rules of the Lists of the SCA.- - -
1.8.6. Do not drop, throw, set down, or otherwise leave anything on a field during combat.
This rule is correct as written. It does not stop me from setting my weapon down off the side of the field or handing it off to a marshal to do the same.
- - -
1.9 does not include a ‘lay on’ command, but 1.10 does. They either both should or neither should.
Good catch, will add to revision.- - -
1.10.2. Fighters may strike any opponent with any legal blow if they are within the 180 degree arc of the opponent's front.
a. A fighter who approaches an opponent from behind shall not deliver a blow until he is within that frontal arc.
A term has already been defined for this and is better than the wording here. 180 degree act from my front, is 360 degrees as you have 180 to the left and 180 to the right of front. A simple correction might be as follows:
2. Fighters may strike any opponent with any legal blow if they are within their opponents field of contact.
a. A fighter who approaches an opponent from behind shall not deliver a blow until he is within his opponents field of contact.
I think this is splitting hairs, to be honest, but I think I see your point. However, a 180 arc of the opponents front is NOT 360 degrees. It is not 180 degrees FROM the front, but a 180 degree arc OF the opponent's front - which is, as you say, left to right.
Perhaps we just call it redundant, and remove?- - -
2.3.5.b. Gussets are a sewing term. Not all armor has gussets. Mine does not. I am puncture resistant all the way around my arm to my elbow...thus no gusset. Although a bit convoluted, a correction could be made as follows:
b. The armpit protection must at least cover a triangle with the base aligned with the joint of the under side of the arm and the body extending at least 1/3 of the way down the upper arm and from at least the center line of the biceps to at least the center line of the triceps.
What draft of the rules are you reading? I think it is fine the way it is in the current draft. No need to make it more confusing.
---
2.3.5.c. Male fighters must wear rigid genital protection in addition to puncture resistant groin protection.
I am not stating a correction here. Most forms of Doublet armor do not cover this area and most fighters do not wear puncture resistant pants.
Then they have been out of compliance of the rules for many years. This is not new. And no one said anything about puncture resistant pants. Just the groin area. I take care of this within the same garment that holds my ridig protection.
---
2.3.5.a. Cut and Thrust rapier
iv. Additional padding over the ribs is recommended.
This is simply numbered incorrectly. It should be:
2.3.5.d. Cut and Thrust rapier
i. Additional padding over the ribs is recommended.
Good catch, will add to revision.- - -
1.7.8. Unless otherwise defined by the MiC, Simultaneous kills are mutually destructive. Each fighter receives a loss.
This belongs in Rules of the List, not Acknowledgement of Blows
Disagree, since Rules of the List are set at the Society level, and apply to all forms of combat in the Society.----
Please take no offence in any of my suggestions as none is intended.
None taken. 