Bump

Everything goes in cycles. Standards will go from very lax to very strict, and enforcement will do the same. That's what's going on with the fencing rulebook right now - we've gone from rather specific, fairly strict rules governing everything from how hard you should hit to what constitutes a draw cut to a far broader set of rules. Most of these changes are geared towards how we play, as opposed to what we use to play.

And Yet...

At the tournament this last weekend, we had two people (that I know of) out of the nine entrants that were bounced for armor failures. One for a hole in their glove that you could drive a (small) car through, and the other for insufficient armor on their torso and the back of their head. The thing is, the one who failed because of insufficient armor had been passed many times using the exact same setup.

So what was going on?

Remember how I said that the new rules loosened up on hit calibration? Well, it used to be that you didn't have to accept an overly-forceful shot? That part's gone. Yes the rules still say, "Striking an opponent with excessive force, or with deliberate intent to injure, is forbidden," but it then defines excessive force as, "If a fighter throws blows which force their opponent to retire from the field, from a real injury (even one which only causes brief incapacitation), the marshal responsible for the field shall take such steps as are appropriate to stop the problem from recurring." So, in short, it's not excessive unless it forces you off the field. And did you notice that there's no mention of the shot not being good? Just that the marshal can pull the person's card.

Okay, but what does this have to do with people's armor getting bounced? Well, without that top end to what constitutes a good blow, you are going to get hit harder. And when you combine that with the tendency in recent years for marshals in Artemisia to be a little more lax - a little more understanding, the odds of someone getting injured is going up.

What do I mean by lax? Currently, the effective requirement for the back of the head in this kingdom is a covering of some sort. Many of the drops in use are a single or double layer of light cloth. They're supposed to be the same as the torso - puncture resistant. This is partly to protect from punctures (well, duh), but it's also to minimize the effects of chops or percussive hits. Likewise, I've started to see a disturbing trend in fencers viewing underarm protection as a suggestion, rather than a requirement.

And too often, the excuse they use when it is brought up is that they are working on new armor. That excuse may work for a month or two, but when the marshal's been hearing it for years, it's time to call bullshit.

Yes, this laxness is the fault of the marshals. For too long, we've thought that if you're stupid enough to wear sub-standard armor, it's your own damn fault, but with the increase in hit force we're starting to see, the armor requirements really have become the minimum you need.