Why Riddle of Steel

[Jake Norwood]

Bob Wrote:

2) Being TRAINED in a martial art-- and practicing it as a martial art-- is still a million miles away from actually FIGHTING, though it is closer than most of us ever get. As Jake understands the principles of swordsmanship, so do I understand the principles of the force. Sure, he's had more PRACTICE using a sword, but not ever in a _truly_ realistic fashion. :)

Okay, we've got a lot of discussion about what I do or don't know going on here, so I figured I should finally come in on this. Yes, I have fought, swung, and defended myself against a piece of steel at full speed. Several times. No, my opponent wasn't *trying* to kill me, but he did strike with full intent, speed, etc. If I didn't counter correctly, I'd be dead or badly wounded (and, for the record, not just "scratched").

I train anywhere from 6-10 hours a week. I train with wooden wasters--the western equivalent to bokken during most of my work with other partners. All of my solo work is done with steel--not wall-hangers, but well-made and functional swords. I regularly cut and work at the pell. I also spar *a lot.* I am an ARMA certified Free-Scholar, proficient in the Longsword, greatsword, and Cut-and-thrust styles. I have dabbled in English staff, rondel fighting, german grappling and knife fighting, and sword-and-shield (by "dabbling" I mean that I can beat any untrained person any time, assuming bad luck doesn't step in). I am the head of the ARMA in Utah (NOT worldwide), and responsible for the training of anywere from 2-20 padawans (okay, newbies...) at any given time.

I am not a "master" (not even close), but I have used all of my training in acutal full-speed sparring. I understand the function of a sword and the nature, result, generics and specifics of every technique in TROS, plus several that I left out for simplicity's sake.

Bob-
I appreciate your praise of the game, as well as your criticism, but I don't thing you and Fang are speaking the same language. No, TROS isn't really fighting (duh). But it is not--in any way, shape, or form--derived from ficticious books or movies (or any movies, actually). It is modeled after the real thing as it was really practiced, including the most realistic model we (or anyone, IMHO) possible could.

Also, combat and the force are apples and oranges. The only person that might even get the force is George L, and I doubt that really he does (midichlorians, anyone?). But I get swordfighting. I practice it. Do I need to kill someone in mortal combat to be called "a swordsman" or even a sort of authority in the matter...I sure as hell hope not. I don't just understand the principles of swordfighting, I have applied them in a safe (more or less...*grin*) manner. Have you--or anyone--ever successfully applied the force? I have successfully applied every technique in TROS on multiple occassions, without killing anyone.

If you want to spar sometime, give me a four foot stick and you can have the force, and we'll see what happens (heck, I'll give you a stick to go with the force).

Anyway, this isn't a flame, but I did feel that there was a lot of conversation about what I do and don't know without actually consulting me at any point. If I can be of further service in explaining my "credentials," let me know.

Jake

[Bob Richter]

Bob Wrote:

2) Being TRAINED in a martial art-- and practicing it as a martial art-- is still a million miles away from actually FIGHTING, though it is closer than most of us ever get. As Jake understands the principles of swordsmanship, so do I understand the principles of the force. Sure, he's had more PRACTICE using a sword, but not ever in a _truly_ realistic fashion. :)

Okay, we've got a lot of discussion about what I do or don't know going on here, so I figured I should finally come in on this. Yes, I have fought, swung, and defended myself against a piece of steel at full speed. Several times. No, my opponent wasn't *trying* to kill me, but he did strike with full intent, speed, etc. If I didn't counter correctly, I'd be dead or badly wounded (and, for the record, not just "scratched").

I train anywhere from 6-10 hours a week. I train with wooden wasters--the western equivalent to bokken during most of my work with other partners. All of my solo work is done with steel--not wall-hangers, but well-made and functional swords. I regularly cut and work at the pell. I also spar *a lot.* I am an ARMA certified Free-Scholar, proficient in the Longsword, greatsword, and Cut-and-thrust styles. I have dabbled in English staff, rondel fighting, german grappling and knife fighting, and sword-and-shield (by "dabbling" I mean that I can beat any untrained person any time, assuming bad luck doesn't step in). I am the head of the ARMA in Utah (NOT worldwide), and responsible for the training of anywere from 2-20 padawans (okay, newbies...) at any given time.

I am not a "master" (not even close), but I have used all of my training in acutal full-speed sparring. I understand the function of a sword and the nature, result, generics and specifics of every technique in TROS, plus several that I left out for simplicity's sake.

Bob-
I appreciate your praise of the game, as well as your criticism, but I don't thing you and Fang are speaking the same language. No, TROS isn't really fighting (duh). But it is not--in any way, shape, or form--derived from ficticious books or movies (or any movies, actually). It is modeled after the real thing as it was really practiced, including the most realistic model we (or anyone, IMHO) possible could.

Also, combat and the force are apples and oranges. The only person that might even get the force is George L, and I doubt that really he does (midichlorians, anyone?). But I get swordfighting. I practice it. Do I need to kill someone in mortal combat to be called "a swordsman" or even a sort of authority in the matter...I sure as hell hope not. I don't just understand the principles of swordfighting, I have applied them in a safe (more or less...*grin*) manner. Have you--or anyone--ever successfully applied the force? I have successfully applied every technique in TROS on multiple occassions, without killing anyone.

If you want to spar sometime, give me a four foot stick and you can have the force, and we'll see what happens (heck, I'll give you a stick to go with the force).

Anyway, this isn't a flame, but I did feel that there was a lot of conversation about what I do and don't know without actually consulting me at any point. If I can be of further service in explaining my "credentials," let me know.

Jake

Eh. I wasn't actually trying to comment on what you do or don't know. :)
(Aside of the fact that I'm pretty sure you haven't been in a kill-or-be-killed swordfight. Even *I*'ve been in fights with people swinging "live" weapons at me with full speed, force, and apparent intent. That wasn't how they were SUPPOSED to happen, but rather how they*DID*.)
The biggest part of my point was that you didn't actually HAVE to practice medieval combat to get it right in an RPG -- that's entirely a matter of research.

The only problem with sparring that way is the minor problem with accessing the force in the real world. :)

But, yeah, I'm not actually a Jedi. That was just the tiniest bit of hyperbole. Actually, I'm more of an anti-Jedi. :)

[Le Joueur]

6. I still have to say that the appeal of The Riddle of Steel is not the accuracy or verisimilitude or 'realism,' but how all of that is used to engage the player.  I don't know why I am having so much trouble getting past the 'is it real or not' argument with you when all I have been saying is that that isn't the issue; it's how the [whatever you want to call it] is used to engage the players, not how much of [whatever you want to call it] The Riddle of Steel has.

What I have been saying is that, by depending on his own experiences, Jake has tapped into an essence of [whatever you want to call it] that colors how his game is engaging.  He didn't just 'stick' it in there; this quality is subservient to what makes the game engaging yet an important part of it.

Theoretically the same could be done for old-time movie serials, like George Lucas claims to want to make.  If you could capture that essence and then put it wholly in the service of what makes a game engaging, you would have a better game than one that simply makes a point of 'being like' those serials.  It's a subtle distinction (being 'serial' versus being engaging via 'serialness'), but I think the important one that answers "Why The Riddle of Steel?" for me as a game designer.

6) And now you've completely lost me.

That has become abundantly clear.  If you can't distinguish between 'realism to serve engagement' and 'realism for its own sake,' then there's just no way I can explain my point.  This also explains why you seem only interested in arguing about realism in The Riddle of Steel.

Whether or not The Riddle of Steel is realistic, or how much, was not at issue in my point.  I'm not debating that.  My point is independant of the 'amount of realism' in The Riddle of Steel; it was about the use of however much there is, regardless.

7) We may have to agree to disagree.

I can accept that if you will.

Fang Langford