A sport fencer's view of D&D (Iron Heroes) feats

[kigmatzomat]

Depends. A real epee requires strength to penetrate, unless you specialize in the draw cut. Draw cuts are safer, as there's less chance of weapon binding, but slower as you wait for your foe to pass out from blood loss. Do you go for the quick kill or pray you can parry your foes thrusts before he bleeds out? In D&D draw cuts aren't modeled but should be "wounding" attacks that do minimal damage individually but bleed out over time.

Sabers, which are still fencing, can get pretty heavy over time and from what I was told by a few saber fencers, tends to leave welts, just from the force required to get the weapons up to a decent speed.

I did combat fencing (SCA) where you don't fence to touch, you fence to the "kill." A proper hit was on the verge of leaving a bruise, theory being anything less wouldn't penetrate very deep if you were using a real sword. I tended to be covered in quarter-sized bruises after a session. Hits to the arm or leg result in fighting one-handed or from your knees. There are some space restrictions but no limits on movement. Blocking is allowed and some matches allow multiple weapons, bucklers, or even capes.

Feinting is an acquired skill, in part based on style. I'm left handed and fight gauntlet forward/sword rear, since that's my preferred stance from a year or two of tai kwon do. I had a massive reach with a lunge because I step across. I could do a partial lunge, double tapping my front foot which combined with my odd stance threw opponents' timing off until they adapted. It also meant I was better close to the foe as I was used to fighting with my blade tip only a foot or so from my body. Down side was that my hand was an exposed target, though I was accustomed to deflecting blows. Draw cuts were the biggest risk, that and the risk of facing someone fast enough to dodge the lunge and get behind me.

One of our combat fencers was also a sport fencer ranked in the top 100 nationally of his age class, back in college. His coaches said that if he'd started fencing in high school instead of college he might have been olympic material. He was just scary fast. I could out lunge him but he could outrun me. Generally I was happy if I lasted fifteen seconds with him. Bugger was also almost ambidextrous and could fight with two epees. It was about 50/50 if two of us could take him before he got us. My roommate was a natural athlete and was able to make a good challenge but didn't have the skill or experience.

 

[pawsplay]

I would submit that part of the process of "learning to fence" is in acquiring the feat "weapon finesse." Most people tend to think of fighting with a weapon as swinging it in large, wide arcs. Learning economy of movement and repositioning is a very different kind of fighting. In my experience, it can be done with some weapons, but not others.

I'm not sure I buy that. I think Weapon Finesse represents a special kind of fighting... all other things being equal, a stronger fighter has a distinct advantage, and weapon finesse is a feat that allows you to partially cancel it.

There is a word for the style of fighting in "large, wide arcs." It's called "dead." My experience tells me that any skill in fighting involves efficiency of movement, timing, positioning. Believe me, I've beaten light sword with slow, heavy mace (mostly as a dare) and I can tell you, it was very much a matter of getting him to "walk into" my swing, as that is not a race you are going to win on speed...

Sport fencing may be very much Dex-based, but if you make any extrapolation to the real world, that artificial situation disappears immediately.

To put it another way, would you want to "fence" with someone who was under the effects of an enlarge person spell?

 

[Imp]

To put it another way, would you want to "fence" with someone who was under the effects of an enlarge person spell?

Well, no, but not because of strength, because of reach.

Re sport fencing & strength, it's real easy to inflict bruises with even a foil without hurting your speed; fencers try not to do it because it's bad sportsmanship.

 

[Driddle]

Sport fencing may be very much Dex-based, but if you make any extrapolation to the real world, that artificial situation disappears immediately.

Sport fencing not part of the "real world."

Your perspective is ... intriguing. Care to elaborate? Your certainty suggests insight into the basis for sport fencing, perhaps the period it was derived from. Court swords, maybe?

 

[hong]

Sport fencing not part of the "real world."

Well, duh.

 

[Driddle]

Well, duh.

I love you, Hong.

 

[Thunderfoot]

I'm<SNIP>There is a word for the style of fighting in "large, wide arcs." It's called "dead." My experience tells me that any skill in fighting involves efficiency of movement, timing, positioning. Believe me, I've beaten light sword with slow, heavy mace (mostly as a dare) and I can tell you, it was very much a matter of getting him to "walk into" my swing, as that is not a race you are going to win on speed...

Sport fencing may be very much Dex-based, but if you make any extrapolation to the real world, that artificial situation disappears immediately.

I was going to rip this to shreds until I read it more closesly. I think you are off a little on your assessment, but only a little. 10th - 14th c. fighting styles did rely on large arcs, however when they hit the "Cleave" feat suddenly makes sense. It is interesting to see what goes for sword play in the modern era with the influence of Eastern martial styles (very much finesse as well as strength). Many of the "normal" sword movements used in stage fighting and movies would have left you dead in the early middle ages. Swinging your sword around in your hands just meant that you didn't have a proper grip, and usually leaves you open to lose either your hand or arm when the sword is in the down position. (And if you are a katana fanboy, Japanese swords were no better than their western counterparts, museums have examples from both regions that show western society was on par if not better than their eastern cousins.)

However, large arcs are just what was used, I'm not talking 'lightsaber' swings mind you, but straight chops that most people seems to relegate to the axe, but if a proper sword was used correctly it was quite conceiveable that you would lose a limb in battle and therefore, bleed to death or at the very least, contract an infection and die later' hence the need for armor. As for sport fencing versus self defense, even though several parts of modern sport fencing would prove useless, they all evolved from actual 15th-17th c. fighting styles, so with a very small amount of modification, they would be 'back in th fight' so to speak. Switch the epee to a rapier and viola' instant carnage.

And btw pawsplay, I would never go up against a man (or woman) armed with a mace b thinking I can win out of hand, thats just asking for a clonk on the noggin' And in case you wish to know, yes I have a few years of bladesmanship under my belt (though I am in no way in 'fighting shape' anymore.)

 

[Fenris]

I’m an epee fencer of about 10 years experience. I’m fairly competitive at the regional level (can’t afford to attend a lot of national tourneys). I’m also certified through the USFCA (coaches association) and I’m experienced enough to teach technique and tactics. It’s safe to say I love my sport dearly.

If you truely loved the sport you'd fence foil.

Seriously though, very nice analysis. As to weapon finesse, I think sabre fencers don't finesse nearly as much, and do rely upon brute force ( along with quick reflexes to establish right of way) moe than foil or epee fencers.

 

[hong]

I love you, Hong.

With all of your body, including your pee-pee? It doesn't count unless you love me with all of your body, including your pee-pee.

 

[pawsplay]

I was going to rip this to shreds until I read it more closesly.

I think you are off a little on your assessment, but only a little. 10th - 14th c. fighting styles did rely on large arcs, however when they hit the "Cleave" feat suddenly makes sense.

A good swing may be long, but it's not wide. Your description of the axe-like movement is dead on. A n ideal greatsword swing comes down, ultimately, it's just a question of which down, exactly, it's coming from. Even in early styles, however, many of the telling blows were short and aimed at the neck or another joint.

The first three plates here tell a very informative story:

http://www.thearma.org/Manuals/talhoffer.htm