Should we change the NAAMA combat rules regarding strikes?

[David]

My view from the other thread,

[kiwifruitbat]

I'm kind of distant here, but my vote is no.

While there are reasonable and valid points made for full blow combat, with full power striking and full armour accuracy, I would much rather be associated with a sport that made it easier for a complete newcomer (or be someone who had fallen out of training to get back in easily) to be able to take this up and choose where to go from there.

While Alan Axe makes the point of factionalization within NAAMA, my understanding when I first joined and started training was that NAAMA was an umbrella organisation - factions were already present. Merely easy to meet, common rules were to be followed for clubs wanting to tight each other.

Ergo, there is no reason why there cannot be an organisation for the heavy blows single/mass combat... and at the October gathering, the three groups (Heavy full contact with steel, SCA, NAAMA) could meet in the spirit of camaraderie.

But changing all NAAMA to potentially critical wounds?

No.

[Victorius]

So far, lots of responses.

Now, just in case there's any confusion, what is not being advocated here are full-power strikes. Instead, the proposal is to update from :

"All blows must be controlled and a touch is all that is necessary for a hit to be counted..."

to

"All blows must be controlled. Each strike must be landed so that had it been delivered with full power and with a sharp weapon, the strike would have killed or disabled the victim and removed them from the battlefield...One must land a solid and clean hit with the edge of a blade, usually accompanied with a draw of the blade across the opponent’s body."

In other words, there is no case for harder blows, merely ones that look harder than "a touch".

Let's not count the last vote, as no-one has been advocating full-power strikes (we'll leave that for BON, a style that already fulfills the desires of heavy-hitters).

Of course, all of this could be a moot point, as the existing NAAMA headblow combatants have already been delivering what I've been advocating for the past six or more years. So the new proposal, as it were, is already de facto in force in that style of NAAMA combat. I was merely looking to introduce it to NAAMA non-headblow.

The matter of historical accuracy in kit and garb is something that has also been raised, but that should be dealt with elsewhere, if it is a pressing enough issue to generate discussion. We would all, of course, expect such for public displays, such as day events or the likes of Taupo. With private closed events, such as NAAMA, it may be a different matter. Some events, such as BC Camp and Werecewode, already cater to re-enactors who wish to enforce a stricter standard in a closed event setting.

[Ben]

nope - don't start ignoring votes because you don't think the person is thinking the same way you are.
People might be confused as to what the result of such a change would be... That very same confusion is part of why this rule change is BAD (and because the very same person that started this latest debate on the rules HAS been pushing for harder hits)

[Victorius]

[Hawkwind™]

[ChronicD]

Hi all,

I put myself with hawkwinds comments in this thread - its a vote based upon two options that were not generated in a discourse on the topic. ie a rational discussion on what constitutes safe/fun/skillful/martial fighting for participation from a wide range of skill/periods/backgrounds/experience.

In other words a vote is meaningless when the options are not those that i would put forward, with this in mind i also vote neither.

On a side note i would vote for change to the regs - not sure what to and really that is what needs to be discussed. Why i would like to amend them is simple, there is a change in how/what people participate in and really this needs to be considered in regulations that enable all these differences to come on one field in a safe environment where fun can be had. I was writing that we can test our skill against each other in one place but i thinking about it i actually dont think you really can, so perhaps the NAAMA regs are there more to create a place that safe place to have fun in rather then test yourself against an equal. On that tangent perhaps then it is our attitude towards mass combat that needs to be accounted in the regs - ie testing of ones skill should not be the goal, having fun, looking cool and bonding are. I wander if the regs could account for this in way that marshals could actually enforce/manage this.

anyway i'll stop there

my midday thoughts
Dan

[Victorius]

[ChronicD]

[Victorius]

[hopies]

NAAMA Rules cannot be changed unless it is voted on in the Captains meeting at the NAAMA event itself.

There is a captains meeting at this years NAAMA. Monday Morning.

Anyone with issues about NAAMA combat should give your views to your INDIVIDUAL CAPTAINS who will bring this up at the meeting.

As far as my knowledge goes only CAPTAINS and HEAD TRAINERS have the right to vote on any NAAMA issues.

The NAAMA combat rules will not be changed for NAAMA 2012 in any way,

However...... we will be running multiple fighting fields in diffrent styles including Armour NAAMA rules, Headblow, BON, SCA heavy, SCA Rapier, NAAMA combat, Archery Combat as well as a multitude of tournaments.

Put up or shut up my lovelies - National Association of Ancient and Medieval Arts 2014 is still open. Change the rules then.

Love yall

Sophie
Head Honch and Final Stopping Point of NAAMA 2012

[Victorius]

[David]

[David]

[ChronicD]