Yesterday was Balfar's Challenge, and also the first field battle test for my modified armor suit. Here are the results:
Head 8/10: Padding was fantastic, not even a smashing blow from a man who I'm pretty sure wanted the marshals to carry my limp body off the field could even stun me. Strategic padding kept me from a weakspot, and the sound dampening kept ringing down and still let me hear orders. Only draw back was on the chinstrap, though comfortable, a good solid blow that shook the helm sideways could slide it up infront of my face. Not a massive issue, considering that if such a thing happens, I likely will have the time to adjust myself while I'm dead. Should be able to fix that easily.
New Fix: a small bit of soft cloth attached to the forehead pad; hood rubs raw, and the padding leaves a red mark.
Neck N/A: Did not take a hit to the neck, but it was comfortable, non-imparing, and the only issue I found was that I would have prefered a bit more snug feel. Might cover it in soft cloth.
Body Mid 9/10: The main part of the armor held up like a dream, the modified segmentation allowed me a great range of movement without sacrificing good solid protection all the way around. It was comfortable, allowed fantastic flexibility, and saved my squishy bits like nothing else. Only drawback was the adhesive I used for the fur didn't exactly hold up on my left side with my shield arm constantly rubbing against it. Might have been more of a "why is my shield as heavy as a pony" issue, but it's an easy fix.
New Fix: Might sew some of the sheepskin onto it, and use a stronger adhesive.
Hanging Side plate on the right kept getting caught in my leggings, really annoying, but not so much a hinderance. Might have a good fix for it in the near future, we'll see.
Pauldrons N/A: While they were light, and very stylish, my shoulders didn't take a single hit, so my special padding and under coat were not truly tested unfortunately. Might have been that the addition of the ragged black fur, as well as being sexy, made it hard to know where my shoulder was, resulting in numerous "near hits" as blades fell aside. Didn't think about that, now I'm going to see if I can keep that working for me.
Legs: 10/10: Legs performed like a dream. Light, fantastically padded protection, not a single leg injury in combat. The only injury came from a test hit where Kevin slammed me harder than anyone could feasibly pull off (I literally held my leg up and out for him to use as an anvil). The custom knee joints left my knees fully protected from the front and sides, while being small and allowing me to run with such ease I had little problem dancing around groups of fighters. I took a pole arm to the side of the knee, and barely felt it, and the fit was beautiful. Little tweaking at home, and now they're just comfier than before. I hardly notice them at all.
New Fix: changed the belt to be a bit more secure, and the ties to be permanent, now I'll only have to put it on and never worry if my tie is coming lose.
Arms: Elbows 8/10: Modified elbows fit snugly, and I had no issue with sliding as the gauntlets kept them tightly in place. Hits on them were held off by form and padding, and the only thing I'd do different is a bit of sewing to make sure the straps don't weaken, and a bit of hiding on the standout white. Not an issue at all with movement, I hardly noticed them after a minute or three.
New Fix: Might disguise them as cloth tied around the elbow.
Arms: Vambraces: 8/10 for Right, 3/10 for Left. Right arm felt fin, and had no issues at all with it, just a bit of comfort nuances that can be fixed with a bit of padding here and there, but nothing that was really an issue. Left arm had serious issues as that my shield pushed my vambrace into the bones of my wrist whenever my shield was not raised in combat. My arm went numb by the end of the day, and ached terribly. A better shield would have helped, but I might need to keep an eye on this in the future, as it could be an injury waiting to happen.
Gauntlets: I only used my left, under the shield, and it felt fine. I'm certain that the right would have been fine as well (the ones I borrowed were uncomfortable and made my hand slow), and I think with a bit of tweaking I could have a set that no one could contest.
Overall Rating 9/10: I took no injuries, and it felt great on me. Three things stood out;
Maneuverability: I was fast, and felt no hindurance while fighting.
Weight: My armor felt like it was not there for most of the battles, I could have worn it for days.
Heat: Unlike many of the other fighters near me, I was completely cool for the bulk of the fighting. With my armor being designed to protect key places and sync together, it left a lot of little places for air to get inside and keep me cool and flowing. There was no issue with the fur, as it was not on my body but held away, and the open face of the guard allowed easy breathing and ventilation the whole time.
I could see, breath, and move, like I was just out for a stroll. Next on my list for building: Minor Shin Guards, disguised as boot toppers (just incase), coverings for my hanging side plates that hide and keep them from catching on things (thinking of making one look like a fur hanging, and the other like a pouch to keep auth cards and rule books in there), cool designs on the helm (because.. you know, coolness).
New Project: Weapons.
Sunday, April 20, 2014
Monday, April 7, 2014
Madness, Methods, and Moral Ambiguity
Madness... insanity... confusion...
These are the typical creative points behind crafting a story's villain, it's easy really. You take a man, and you add one of these by removing something else. Remove a man's morals, and you find yourself with a man who is unbound by rule; then you simply add either Madness, or Confusion to this mix. A confused man with no morals will do random things, and should one of them clash with society, you now have a man who doesn't believe in apologies angry with the world.
That's bad.
You take another man, and you remove his sense of worth, and you then add in Madness; resulting in a man who cares little for his own sake, but is unpredictable and devious.
This is a functional way to create the base villain for a story... it's also exactly what I want to smash with a hammer for "#Villain".
You see, the problem with insanity is it's general function: insane people want the world to make sense to them. Delusions start when someone who's got mixed up wiring forces the world to fit a viewpoint they need to exist. The world does not make sense, so they force it to do so. This driving need is what pushes them to extremes such as violence and expensive themed outfits.
... and this is the way to make a compelling villain.
A sane person knows the world doesn't make sense at all, and just accepts it, but what is sense? Sense is when things are the way they should be, for good reasons. Chocolate is good, as is peanut butter, so therefore them together must be awesome. It's logical. Mint is good, as it orange juice, but combine them and it's awful. We hate that, but it's life, sometimes two good things don't make a great thing.
To a madman, this cannot stand.
See, sane people want the world to make sense, but they lack the frothing desire to force it to when it fails. It's where the tagline for the book "#Villain" comes from:
"The difference between sanity, and madness, is that sanity isn't infectious."
Fun quote, yes, but it goes deeper.
We all have voices inside our heads, they tell us to do things daily: "pick up the trash", "go to work", or "I really want good New York pizza..." Mostly they're innocuous commands that make sense; trash is bad, work is needed, and pizza is fantastic. We also have those... other ones: "She's hot, I should grab her", "my boss is a dick, can't report him and stay hired... I could hit him with a chair," or "if this person doesn't maintain the same speed on the highway, I'm running them off the road".
For the most part, normal people ignore these voices, or beat them with reason: "it's wrong to grab people", "killing my boss isn't an option", and "I can't kill stupid people." We counter-justify why we do or don't do things, as to a moral standing and social contract. Conversely, a madman does not adhere to either of those... but why?
To a madman, the world can't just not make sense, it has to. They work tirelessly to make the world fit their view, whether it means they have to eat crayons and attempt to shit the rainbow, or burn down the IRS building so that they understand "extenuating circumstances", a madman's goal isn't to unbalance the world, but put it back into balance.
This is where madness becomes infectious, because it's easy to drown out the voices that tell you "my neighbor parks on my lawn... I'll burn his car", when it's just you. When suddenly there's a man shouting that we shouldn't have to deal with crippling social issues because we can fix the world... well, that's harder.
There's so much in the world that happens, but doesn't make sense: student loans (as my topic of the day is), are in effect; the stupidest idea in the history of education. The idea that you take a person who's dedicating years of their life to learning something important, and you monetize it to the point where it takes them longer than their total lifespan to repay you... you've just put a wall between society and progress. As this grows, the wall gets taller, and the rift gets bigger. You'd think that making it easy for people to better themselves would benefit all of mankind, instead of burning mankind to the ground so that one can be king of the ashes...
... then some crazy man comes around and says "I don't care about your 'rules', your rules only serve to keep you in place, it's not 'the rules' it's "your rule", as if over us. I will tear down your wall, and you with it. You're creating something you know will bite you, but your motive is that you'll outlive it, or out distance it when it tries. Your rule doesn't make sense, therefore... fuck your rule."
Congrats! We all are slightly agreeing with a madman... the world doesn't make sense, but this guy is saying that he can make it do so. Not that he can "show you how it makes sense", but literally "force it into making sense".
He's telling you he can make mint and orange taste as good as chocolate and peanut butter... and if you're really invested in your enjoyment of oranges juice and mint, you'll listen. I mean, what's it going to hurt to just listen...
These are the typical creative points behind crafting a story's villain, it's easy really. You take a man, and you add one of these by removing something else. Remove a man's morals, and you find yourself with a man who is unbound by rule; then you simply add either Madness, or Confusion to this mix. A confused man with no morals will do random things, and should one of them clash with society, you now have a man who doesn't believe in apologies angry with the world.
That's bad.
You take another man, and you remove his sense of worth, and you then add in Madness; resulting in a man who cares little for his own sake, but is unpredictable and devious.
This is a functional way to create the base villain for a story... it's also exactly what I want to smash with a hammer for "#Villain".
You see, the problem with insanity is it's general function: insane people want the world to make sense to them. Delusions start when someone who's got mixed up wiring forces the world to fit a viewpoint they need to exist. The world does not make sense, so they force it to do so. This driving need is what pushes them to extremes such as violence and expensive themed outfits.
... and this is the way to make a compelling villain.
A sane person knows the world doesn't make sense at all, and just accepts it, but what is sense? Sense is when things are the way they should be, for good reasons. Chocolate is good, as is peanut butter, so therefore them together must be awesome. It's logical. Mint is good, as it orange juice, but combine them and it's awful. We hate that, but it's life, sometimes two good things don't make a great thing.
To a madman, this cannot stand.
See, sane people want the world to make sense, but they lack the frothing desire to force it to when it fails. It's where the tagline for the book "#Villain" comes from:
"The difference between sanity, and madness, is that sanity isn't infectious."
Fun quote, yes, but it goes deeper.
We all have voices inside our heads, they tell us to do things daily: "pick up the trash", "go to work", or "I really want good New York pizza..." Mostly they're innocuous commands that make sense; trash is bad, work is needed, and pizza is fantastic. We also have those... other ones: "She's hot, I should grab her", "my boss is a dick, can't report him and stay hired... I could hit him with a chair," or "if this person doesn't maintain the same speed on the highway, I'm running them off the road".
For the most part, normal people ignore these voices, or beat them with reason: "it's wrong to grab people", "killing my boss isn't an option", and "I can't kill stupid people." We counter-justify why we do or don't do things, as to a moral standing and social contract. Conversely, a madman does not adhere to either of those... but why?
To a madman, the world can't just not make sense, it has to. They work tirelessly to make the world fit their view, whether it means they have to eat crayons and attempt to shit the rainbow, or burn down the IRS building so that they understand "extenuating circumstances", a madman's goal isn't to unbalance the world, but put it back into balance.
This is where madness becomes infectious, because it's easy to drown out the voices that tell you "my neighbor parks on my lawn... I'll burn his car", when it's just you. When suddenly there's a man shouting that we shouldn't have to deal with crippling social issues because we can fix the world... well, that's harder.
There's so much in the world that happens, but doesn't make sense: student loans (as my topic of the day is), are in effect; the stupidest idea in the history of education. The idea that you take a person who's dedicating years of their life to learning something important, and you monetize it to the point where it takes them longer than their total lifespan to repay you... you've just put a wall between society and progress. As this grows, the wall gets taller, and the rift gets bigger. You'd think that making it easy for people to better themselves would benefit all of mankind, instead of burning mankind to the ground so that one can be king of the ashes...
... then some crazy man comes around and says "I don't care about your 'rules', your rules only serve to keep you in place, it's not 'the rules' it's "your rule", as if over us. I will tear down your wall, and you with it. You're creating something you know will bite you, but your motive is that you'll outlive it, or out distance it when it tries. Your rule doesn't make sense, therefore... fuck your rule."
Congrats! We all are slightly agreeing with a madman... the world doesn't make sense, but this guy is saying that he can make it do so. Not that he can "show you how it makes sense", but literally "force it into making sense".
He's telling you he can make mint and orange taste as good as chocolate and peanut butter... and if you're really invested in your enjoyment of oranges juice and mint, you'll listen. I mean, what's it going to hurt to just listen...
Saturday, April 5, 2014
Fencing, Armored, and Hand-To-Hand: Function.
Today's topic is a discussion about fighting, and the reason one should be on the field.
I've known many fighters over the years, good ones, great ones, ones who probably are a greater danger to themselves than others. I've met new fighters, old fighters, and ones who seem to always be "just starting out". I've met people who've never swung a weapon who are incredible fighters, and lifelong martial artists who are in no way fighters. Generally, I like most of them.
Most.
There are, however, the type of fighters that I cannot stand. A smaller, select group of people for whom fighting is less about "the culmination of skill and fortitude pitted against a challenger" and more "I win". I hate fighting "winners". Winners are people who win at things, but do not enjoy them. The like the victory lap, not the race itself. These people are basically the most annoying people to do any sort of fighting with. From sparring to competing, they care only for winning, no matter the cost.
This is not to say that competitive people are wrong, being competitive can be amazing, and a competitive person can be the best person to fight on the field. These people usually -love- the challenges they face, and overcoming them, not just being the guy at the top of the hill.
In the SCA, I come across "Winners" every so often, people who'd do anything to win. This includes: not counting blows, using trick shots above actual form (if it's only functional because of the SCA rules, it's not real form), who use armor exploits (rhino hiding, or wearing clothing that makes combat calibration impossible), and basically anyone who exploits or blatently cheats to win. This is the most frustrating thing to fight against, not because one loses, but because one was cheated out of the reason one showed up.
We came to fight.
One should fight as if victory means little to them, and give each person they fight their very best game. No, this does not mean "destroy each foe with no mercy", but don't let someone win because beating them would be too easy. Give them more than they can take, and win, but don't ruin it for everyone. My number ONE rule of conduct on the field "DON'T BE THAT GUY!". Don't be the guy who no one wants to fight. We want to fight the toughest fighter and win, that's an awesome victory. We want to be the guy who defeats an army on his own. We want to have a great story to tell later. We don't want to be the guy who people passive-aggressively refuse to fight, because it's annoying.
This includes those who fight in a way that can be described as "proper" but is still "fuck-all-annoying" to stand against. Someone who's specialty is "really fast blows to a target area that wouldn't really work, but it wins the match", or one who is constantly rushing in face-to-face in fencing, making calibration impossible. (Note: don't rush in bodily in fencing, or don't complain when you nearly get skewered by someone because you tried to combat-hug them.)
There are no shortcuts in martial arts, no one learns to be a master swordsman in a few short weeks of training (despite what movies tell you), one can learn all of the skills in a single night, and still not have the ability to use them. There is no "accelerated program" there is no way to turn you from a novice, into a master. Even in Rocky, all the skill he used in his fight with Apollo was present at the beginning of the movie, the montage was just him pushing to the limit. He didn't learn a new skill, he mastered his current ones.
Fighting those that will use exploits, or basic cheating, to win is the most frustrating thing to encounter. One steps up, and delivers oneself in a upfront manner, and one is not beaten, not even defeated, just robbed of the challenge. We do not fight because winning is awesome, we fight because the fight is awesome, and winning is fun.
This entry is not born out of bitterness, but the notion that this should be a clear example in the minds of all who fight in things such as the SCA. We came here, as friends, to beat eachother with things until someone is declared dead. Friends don't cheat against friends, they don't bend the rules to give themselves an advantage over their friends. Those that cannot beat their friends on the field, should strive to be good enough to beat them. Those that can easily beat their friends, should strive to help them learn.
Take it from me; the man who spent his life either woefully behind, or leagues ahead of everyone he fought with: life is better when those around you are good enough to be a solid challenge. Being the worst is frustrating, and being the best is boring, and both ruin your good time.
I've known many fighters over the years, good ones, great ones, ones who probably are a greater danger to themselves than others. I've met new fighters, old fighters, and ones who seem to always be "just starting out". I've met people who've never swung a weapon who are incredible fighters, and lifelong martial artists who are in no way fighters. Generally, I like most of them.
Most.
There are, however, the type of fighters that I cannot stand. A smaller, select group of people for whom fighting is less about "the culmination of skill and fortitude pitted against a challenger" and more "I win". I hate fighting "winners". Winners are people who win at things, but do not enjoy them. The like the victory lap, not the race itself. These people are basically the most annoying people to do any sort of fighting with. From sparring to competing, they care only for winning, no matter the cost.
This is not to say that competitive people are wrong, being competitive can be amazing, and a competitive person can be the best person to fight on the field. These people usually -love- the challenges they face, and overcoming them, not just being the guy at the top of the hill.
In the SCA, I come across "Winners" every so often, people who'd do anything to win. This includes: not counting blows, using trick shots above actual form (if it's only functional because of the SCA rules, it's not real form), who use armor exploits (rhino hiding, or wearing clothing that makes combat calibration impossible), and basically anyone who exploits or blatently cheats to win. This is the most frustrating thing to fight against, not because one loses, but because one was cheated out of the reason one showed up.
We came to fight.
One should fight as if victory means little to them, and give each person they fight their very best game. No, this does not mean "destroy each foe with no mercy", but don't let someone win because beating them would be too easy. Give them more than they can take, and win, but don't ruin it for everyone. My number ONE rule of conduct on the field "DON'T BE THAT GUY!". Don't be the guy who no one wants to fight. We want to fight the toughest fighter and win, that's an awesome victory. We want to be the guy who defeats an army on his own. We want to have a great story to tell later. We don't want to be the guy who people passive-aggressively refuse to fight, because it's annoying.
This includes those who fight in a way that can be described as "proper" but is still "fuck-all-annoying" to stand against. Someone who's specialty is "really fast blows to a target area that wouldn't really work, but it wins the match", or one who is constantly rushing in face-to-face in fencing, making calibration impossible. (Note: don't rush in bodily in fencing, or don't complain when you nearly get skewered by someone because you tried to combat-hug them.)
There are no shortcuts in martial arts, no one learns to be a master swordsman in a few short weeks of training (despite what movies tell you), one can learn all of the skills in a single night, and still not have the ability to use them. There is no "accelerated program" there is no way to turn you from a novice, into a master. Even in Rocky, all the skill he used in his fight with Apollo was present at the beginning of the movie, the montage was just him pushing to the limit. He didn't learn a new skill, he mastered his current ones.
Fighting those that will use exploits, or basic cheating, to win is the most frustrating thing to encounter. One steps up, and delivers oneself in a upfront manner, and one is not beaten, not even defeated, just robbed of the challenge. We do not fight because winning is awesome, we fight because the fight is awesome, and winning is fun.
This entry is not born out of bitterness, but the notion that this should be a clear example in the minds of all who fight in things such as the SCA. We came here, as friends, to beat eachother with things until someone is declared dead. Friends don't cheat against friends, they don't bend the rules to give themselves an advantage over their friends. Those that cannot beat their friends on the field, should strive to be good enough to beat them. Those that can easily beat their friends, should strive to help them learn.
Take it from me; the man who spent his life either woefully behind, or leagues ahead of everyone he fought with: life is better when those around you are good enough to be a solid challenge. Being the worst is frustrating, and being the best is boring, and both ruin your good time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)