Light head shots

Community Larp discussion
#41

Carl said[quote]I can control my actions but not those of others, And I am fully on Dereks side, if we allow head shots helmets or head/face protectors are a must.[/quote]

So you agree with what Alista said then Carl? Cause Alista agrees its ok with appropriate protection. What he did say is a lot of larpers we have come across don’t want to wear a helmet and that the characters we generate aren’t allowed or don’t wear armor as part of their character theme (being mages and rogues in Quest).
This is also my stance on this matter. Helmet or or you don’t hit above the shoulders. If you hit heads then I would be there in appropriate armor. If I was a SCA type I’d have my helm, if I was sword and shield or whatever over organisation that strikes at heads, I would wear a helmet.
But my mage in a robe with a staff would NOT look how he’s supposed to.
I do agree that the weapon weilded is only as dangerous as the weilder but I strongly disagree that if I dodged or whatever and a strike and it hits my head and injures me that its my fault. It may not be your fault but like hell am I going to just stand there and admire you’re nicely placed shot at whatever target.
As for what works in the UK, are ALL New Zealand Larpers capable of the same discipline? Are they all responsible and skilled enough to accurately use headshots? Regardless of YOUR individual skill level the same cannot be said about the general larping population.
Jared

EDIT: This is an OPINION poll right? Thats what we’re giving yes?

#42

Really I didn’t catch that bit, ok my bad, but the feeling that i got from Alista was that since there are LARPers who do not like wearing helmets, and the fact that there are characters in Quest that are Not Permitted to wear helmets :open_mouth: head shots should not be allowed.

But the question in the poll was (I thought) very Clear, would you participate in a Larp that allowed head shots, what this says to me is, that if someone was to run a game that allowed head shots and allowed for the appropriate protection would you take part. I really dont see why this has truned into a big debate, when the basic question is a simple yes or no.

Personally i think it would remove a lot of the accidental head shots, and make people a bit more protective of thier head so I am for it.

Mike has raised a good idea, lets test it, and find out.

as an aside, in Quest are monks and mages allowed to wear hats or hoods?

#43

Yeah and when they come to Sword and Sheild to train with steel we have to train that habit OUT of them. :angry: [/quote]
Really ? That’s quite surprising. I haven’t ever seen anyone do it. I was more to make it absolutely clear that it is the responsibility of the attacker to make sure they don’t hit the target in the head, no excuses.

All of the headshots I have seen at Skirmish are either deflects from a block, or are the target moving (e.g. ducking) into the path of a bodyshot.

Which is where I can see Ryan’s point. If you are actively targeting the head, you will lower the force you use. Which means that a percentage of total shots will be at a lower force, vs 0% at present (why lower your force if you don’t think you’ll be hitting someone’s head ?).

This won’t reduce the accidental headshots, but it will extend the number of body locations a person may target.

Cool, that makes 3 (Me, you, Ryan) :slight_smile:

#44

Interestingly enough, Alista took a verbal poll of some of our Hamilton based players who don’t post here. Out of 8 people 100% said “absolutely not” to head shots, so Quest will not be changing its no head shot policy.

#45

Cool, we don’t want you to.

#46

[quote=“Carl”]
With all of your experience Alista you must agree that it is easier to control a blow from the start to the finish of your swing, than change it halfway through. I can do it but then i have been fighting with steel for close to ten years now, and posses a skill level that most LARPers dont.

but if i am allowed to target the head and my target drops back, looks up, or ducks into my strike, well that is quite frankly thier fault, and hopefully the black eye they recieve for thier trouble will teach them a valuable lesson, i.e; Dont use your head as a sheild, (Said with all due respect to Mike and Skirmish but this is a mind set that your rule does foster)

I can control my actions but not those of others, And I am fully on Dereks side, if we allow head shots helmets or head/face protectors are a must.[/quote]

I must admit this is the funniest thread I have read in along time. I have come to the conclusion that you guys are just joking so I won’t take it personally. I doubt there is anyone in this country with lots of combat training experience that would not laugh at the views expressed on this site so I guess the humour is intentional and aimed at esperienced players. I am glad that you have been doing weapons training for ten years, you should be leaving the beginners stage and be ready to become a serious student of the art. As you should have learnt in your training, your job is not just to control your actions, but to control the actions of your opponent. This is combat 1.01. Now that you are in combat 2.01 you should be learning how to actually do this.

I agree “that it is easier to control a blow from the start to the finish of your swing, than change it halfway through.” And if that blow is aimed at the body then you are sweet. If you aim the head in the first place and then try and change your mind then you will hit people in the head. The simple solution “Don’t aim for the head”. Mind and body as one. I have that interesting problem that I am limited in what I can do. Most players go ‘Can I hit the torso, should I hit the wrist?’. You and I will always be going I’m not allowed to shoulder strike, I’m not allowed to thrust the throat, I’m not allow to pressure point strike with the butt, I’m not allowed to sweep their feet, I’m not allowed to do a weapons swap with them… and so on. We are severly limited in the responses that we are allowed to do. There is only one response to this, “Get over it”. Live Role Play is a game. As a game we will always be limited in our actions. Our job is to play the game to the best of our abilities, not change the rules to try and gain some advantage over other players.

As to your weapons training,wait til you get to combat 3.01 that is where all the good stuff really kicks in. Controlling elbows, striking through their breathing, left shoulder strikes, all the goodies, but that is probably another eigtht to ten years at this rate.

Having discussed it with our players and receiving a unanamous “No” answer to the concept of head shots I can make these observations. There are plenty of places that you can play where head shots are legal, Kendo, SCA, Some Norse groups, take your pick. If you do choose a game where head shots are legal, then remeber that you are knowigly and purposefully excluding many people that would otherwise play Live Role Play. We have enough trouble with recruiting anyway without trying to be elitist and especially elitist towrds the figher classes to the exclusion of all the other archetypal roles that occur in LRP.

You have made me laugh and smile, if this is your intent then you have done well. As to the other , my club has spoken and there is no further need to participate in this thread.

Happy adventuring.

#47

yeah whatever buddy :unamused:

#48

Hmmm ok. Would I attend a game were head shots were allowed?
Carl I revise what I said. No I wouldn’t attend a game where shots are allowed if it were a GENERAL type fantasy larp UNLESS I was wearing the appropriate armor. This is fine, no issue there. Next: I and others don’t accept the risk of being hit in the face as this risk is multiplied many fold if head shots are allowed if I am not wearing armor.
It would however distinctly not suit me to wear any armor if I were playing a character for which armor is disallowed. This is because I/we value character conceptualisation and realisation over combat technicality.
This point discribed by myself and others simply is there to point out our reasoning, not to say you can’t run a game with head shots.
Alista, you do like to stir don’t you, still if this had stayed light and friendly then I guess you wouldn’t have had the chance.
Jared

EDIT: As a point I think I may have failed to stay 100% positive in this thread, which wasn’t intended, I just wanted to share my view on things, not be a bugbear. Apologies for any bugbearness on my behalf.

#49

No problem, because as we all know, bugbears have 3+1 Hit Dice :smiley:

#50

?Que?

I have yet to see any real motivation for including head shots except for the personal benefit of certain players. I must either concede that these palyers are trying gain an advantage for themselves or are being humourous. As gaining a personal advantage would be both dishonourable and unchivalrous I must conclude that they attempting humour. I give them the benefit of the doubt.

The first question asked should be why does the game need this? This is followed by How does this affect the balance ot the game. These questions have never been answered satisfactorily.

If they are serious then they are certainly able to run a game with these rules.

Happy adventures

#51

Just saying that you tend to pour on the acid at times. And you like doing it for the amusement of seeing the point esculate to ridiculous proportions of hatred.

Jared

#52

I still find it funny that people go into combat orintated LARPS expecting not to feel pain at some point or break something (them selves or materials). “oh dare I broke a nail.”

Alista, actully including head shots would free up a whole range of movment in combat, making it all look and feel that much smoother, as well as inculding another area that people have to keep on their toes about.
which personally ? the greater the challenge the better.

#53

I’m 100% serious Alista, this is not sarcasm or humour. I believe the others here are the same.

In the UK they have both larps with and without headshots allowed. The three biggest larp organisations, CP, LT and PD allow headshots. However, many smaller groups don’t. UK larpers are used to both styles, and will generally go along with whatever the rules are. Your ex-UK players may just be going with the flow, or they may prefer non-head-shots, hard to say without asking them.

I’m just saying that thousands of UK larpers fight safely with headshots every year, and that disproves your idea that it’s unsafe. I don’t understand how you think that is bad logic, it seems blindingly clear to me.

You haven’t addressed the point that they have thousands of people doing headshots safely. It contradicts your belief that it would be unsafe. Jared may have a point when he says they might fight differently there, I think they pull their blows more fully, and usually hit very lightly with just a gentle tap. I haven’t seen you guys at Quest fight, so I don’t know how hard you hit, but I know what people at Mordavia and Skirmish hit harder than what I saw in the UK.

Hmm, obviously you don’t much about karate and modern martial arts.[/quote]

I never claimed to. My point is that karate has nothing to do with foam weapon combat. Punching or kicking someone in the head and hitting them gently in the head with a well-made foam weapon bear only the slightest resemblence to each other. You might as well be trying to compare karate and pillow fighting. We are not discussing karate, it is not relevant here.

People tend to prefer whatever they are used to. Look at the USA, where most people want to keep using their fat ugly boffer weapons because they’re supposedly safer than latex. That’s totally unproven and contradicts the excellent safety record of latex weapons in Europe. Much like your claims about the unsafeness of light head shots.

This thread is not a leg pull. It is a serious attempt to discuss a combat issue. However, you are taking it too personally. I am not saying that one way is better than another, or suggesting that anyone should try something they’re not comfortable with. I’m just wanting to discuss the options and get an impression of people’s opinions.

I am not discussing head shots with head protection, and that’s not what the poll is. It is about light, controlled head shots with no head protection. People are more than welcome to discuss head protection too, but it’s not what I was asking originally.

There are many situations where being able to hit the head lightly would add value, especially when opponents have large shields. It would also make helmets make more sense as an equipment choice in locational armour systems.

#54

In many ways, this is not so much about including head shots as much as not excluding them, if that makes sense. In the real world of orcs and elves, they hit each other in the head so why shouldn’t we? I don’t think head shots would really improve larp combat. I’d play in a game with them, but I don’t think they’d improve the game. The Mordavian approach of limiting shield size worked very well.

I’m not sure who would personally benefit from these rules. I wouldn’t because I probably wouldn’t hit many people in the head. The only advantage I’d get is that I already guard my head so at least I’d be guarding a target :smiley: Alista, I can’t see how it would help any particular group of people, you’ve lost me there.

Ryan’s point about large shields makes sense as well. If someone has a shield like this…

… there isn’t much many people can do to get around it.

One of the aspects I most enjoy about fighting one-on-one with sword and shield is trying to get the other person to cover their vision with their shield. To my knowledge, this is unique amongst any form of marshal art. (competition karate, for example, doesn’t have an equivalent). The best way to do this is usually to aim a shot at the head. As the shield moves up to block the attack, the defender is blinded and the attacker can take advantage of that.

Note: I didn’t manage to vote in this poll. The phpBB software decided I’d already voted or something and didn’t let me.

#55

its human thing to be threatened ic and ooc when someone you hardly know puts something pointy near your face (unless you pay for it).

#56

at the risk of utter public damnation…

all head blow combat has to offer, imho, is a chnace to prove that your kahunas are bigger than the other guys.

nothing more.

this larp people, if you want realism join the army, you’ll have plenty of people out there willing to give yuou a blow to the head anyway you want.

if however you want to larp ACCEPT the fact that some people have limits.

and accept the fact that you DON’t need 10+years sword and sheild training to larp.

if you find yourself unable to accept that this is a game rather than re enacment, then i suggest you return to re enactment and let the larpers play the game in peace.

#57

I’ll accept that this thread is not a leg pull. Then there are two questions that must be asked when introducing anything new into a Lurp,

1.) What are the advantages of this new rule? What does it bring to the game that wasn’t there already?

2.) How does it affect game balance?

Yet to see answers to either of these basic questions.

#58

Never done re-enactment, can hardly return to it. I’m just saying "look what they’re doing IN LARP in the UK, let’s examine why we’re doing it differently.

I don’t reckon it’s anything to do with machismo. Not for me anyhow. I just like pointing out situations where people are sticking with what they’re used to without giving other options a crack.

Funnily enough, I think the reason often given for allowing headshots in UK LARP is crap. Apparently they used to ban them at the Gathering, but they supposedly had a lot of people blocking with their head (could be a myth, but it’s often-repeated) so they unbanned them. I think this is a terrible reason, but I also think that a decade of UK experience shows clearly that allowing light headshots (but avoiding them where possible) works without safety issues.

[quote=“Alista”]1.) What are the advantages of this new rule? What does it bring to the game that wasn’t there already?

2.) How does it affect game balance?

Yet to see answers to either of these basic questions.[/quote]

I think there are numerous advantages stated above. To repeat some:

a) gives attackers more tactical options, especially if defender has large shield or or thier body is otherwise well defended.

b) give helmets an intuitive purpose, especially in location armour systems

c) feels more believable

d) causes defenders to defend their heads, again opening more tactical options

e) means that accidental headshots become part of the natural flow of play, speeding up combat

And probably more, but I gotta go.

#59

[quote=“Ryan Paddy”]How would you feel about attending a live combat event that allowed for light head shots?

Assume that one head shot would take you down, so you won’t be hit repeatedly in the head.[/quote]

I find accidental head blows disorienting and hard to take properly - this means I’m probably not going to fall over immediately on taking a head blow, and probably going to get hit again because of that. Thumbs down.

(This also applies to being hit in the back repeatedly, which already happens)

#60

[quote=“Ryan Paddy”]

[quote=“Alista”]1.) What are the advantages of this new rule? What does it bring to the game that wasn’t there already?

2.) How does it affect game balance?

Yet to see answers to either of these basic questions.[/quote]

I think there are numerous advantages stated above. To repeat some:

a) gives attackers more tactical options, especially if defender has large shield or or thier body is otherwise well defended.

b) give helmets an intuitive purpose, especially in location armour systems

c) feels more believable

d) causes defenders to defend their heads, again opening more tactical options

e) means that accidental headshots become part of the natural flow of play, speeding up combat

And probably more, but I gotta go.[/quote]

Don’t know if these are really advantages. They are consequences. a,b,d,e are usually dealt with in otherways that don’t result in the loss of at least 50% of the player base, and c is the purpose of reeactment and always the realm of LRP.

So still waiting to here advantages that outweigh the loss of 50% of the player base and how this would affect game balance.