half-poling

[Thirsty Viking]

this depends on what you mean by military....

A Staff  RH style can be a martial weapon...  However it is not a FORMATION weapon.  The reason for this being the amount of room for usage.   Just as the two handed sword isn't a formation weapon.   Light troops could use these weapons to some effect...   But not meadium and heavey tropps counting on shield walls, and neighbors for the advantagee of formation fighting.

[Jake Norwood]

I'm going to disagree ENTIRELY on basis of opinion, not any real proof. RH style is not an acutal combat style. You can't kill anyone with it with even 1/3 the efficiency of other styles...therefore it's no good.

Jake

[Thirsty Viking]

an interesting view point jake..  ummm  

Personally i don't want to let people hit me in the head with a quarterstaff used robin hood style.  or any other style for that matter.   I have never used a quarter staff... that being said  i do remember some rather stunning lessons with padded pugel-sticks from the army...  you can debate weather it was RH style or not...   I was happy to have the PADDING  and my HELMET.  

Based soley on my opinion from that...  I'd have to say angular momentum on a staff can be quite forceful.   Now it might have relatively few kill level 5 hits compared to other weapons ...   hyper extended joints, broken bones, and deformes armor are all a bitch though... and the loss of combat dice from all the mass weapon attacks does reduce your effectivness.    I guess it all depends what you mean by RH Style.

I think non RH as using a Spear without a head.  a pugel sticks has more range of attacks at a shorted range.  (designed to simulate using a rifle (held at port arms as a club and a bayonet weapon at close quartes).  I see standing with a rifle at port arms as having many similarities to RH stance with a Quarter Staff.  Not the least of which is you have what is essentialy a blunt dopplehander in halfsword if you step forward with one foot.  (disarm rules?)  finally...  walking staffs don't attract the attention that DEDICATED weapons do from the guard, although they are hard to hide, and almost always noticed.  another advantage to RH a staff is that the DEFENDER should have a Harder TN because it has TWO striking ends...  even if they do hit less hard than 1 dedicated might in a swing.
Finally,  while in a swing,  you don't get the windup power you might with a club.  you pick up momentum with the striking head by moving your hands in opposing directions...  how this balanced out in practice?   I'd need to hit some sort of detecting equipment to judge.   I think you'd be looking at CLUB level damage.  

There may well be fallacies in this assessment by me....   It is purely sitting here thinking theoretically.  Call it my OPINION

If your opinion RH a staff is spinning it like a majorettes twirling baton  ...  I'd not argue with you and you'd see from my post this isn't what I was refering to.

[Jaif]

FWIW, while it hasn't come up yet in a fight, I would let my players 'half-sword' a staff or a spear.  From a game perspective, all half-swording does is allow a combatant to choke-up on their weapon to thrust from a closer range.  If a person can train to do that with a bladed weapon, where changing grips is complicated, then I have to believe a person can do it with a staff or spear, where sliding your grip is easy.

-Jeff[/code]

[Thirsty Viking]

FWIW, while it hasn't come up yet in a fight, I would let my players 'half-sword' a staff or a spear.  From a game perspective, all half-swording does is allow a combatant to choke-up on their weapon to thrust from a closer range.  If a person can train to do that with a bladed weapon, where changing grips is complicated, then I have to believe a person can do it with a staff or spear, where sliding your grip is easy.

-Jeff[/code]

as for half poling...  for many reasons it is far mor limited than half swording.   Also if shield and spear is the case....  then it isn't so easy to shift grip one handed.  possibly better to drop and draw a shortsword.  As with all thing a healthy dose of common sence is required.  some one holding a spear 3 foot behind the head on a 12 foot shaft   is going to be very awkward in the usage.

[Jake Norwood]

an interesting view point jake..  ummm  

Personally i don't want to let people hit me in the head with a quarterstaff used robin hood style.  or any other style for that matter.   I have never used a quarter staff... that being said  i do remember some rather stunning lessons with padded pugel-sticks from the army...  you can debate weather it was RH style or not...   I was happy to have the PADDING  and my HELMET.  

Remember, I didn't say it wasn't lethal...I said it was less than 1/3 as effective as other ways of using one.

Jake

And again, only in my opinion on this one.

[Thirsty Viking]

That was one reason i asked you what exactly you were defining as RH.  and took pains to describe what i was picturing...  incase there was confusion of definitions.  As for tading off some of the offence for the ability to parry,  you may be right.  

wish we had some well trained people to show us the true effectivness,   shrug.  not that it particularly matters i guess.

[Jake Norwood]

That was one reason i asked you what exactly you were defining as RH.  and took pains to describe what i was picturing...  incase there was confusion of definitions.  As for tading off some of the offence for the ability to parry,  you may be right.  

wish we had some well trained people to show us the true effectivness,   shrug.  not that it particularly matters i guess.

I'm referring to what most people think of as a quarterstaff grip, with hands equal length from either end. As far as "a trained person," I know enough about range, leverage, and q-staff usage (both historical and hands-on) to say that not using it at length by holding it "in the middle" will get you whipped against a lesser opponent using it the "long way."

Hope that's clear. Again, see p. 56(?) of TROS to see the "proper" grip as I'm thinking of it.

Jake

[Thirsty Viking]

oddly enough, it looks like two of the guys are using a middle grip for successful parries in that plate.  And have closed to a closer range than the other two groups.  Is that a historical plate?

[Jake Norwood]

oddly enough, it looks like two of the guys are using a middle grip for successful parries in that plate.  And have closed to a closer range than the other two groups.  Is that a historical plate?

Yes, it is, it's from Joachim Meyer, 1567 or thereabouts. The guy in the center pair on the left is holding in "robin-hood" fashion, although he's not using the staff in the whirling fashion that I was referring to. You'll also note that he's using a "very" short staff of about 6' in length, and is holding it that way to close. So yes, "RH" style has certain uses. Also note, however, that he has to close in order to hit his opponenent. Closing is a difficult thing to do against an advanced opponent. In other words, he's not parrying per se, but rather he's closing and using the staff to shield his body as he does so. The "RH" grip also alows him to strike with either side once he closes.

Remember that I said that in *my* opinion it wasn't a very valid way to fight, and that others with training may disagree. I'm a member of the "George Silver" school of thought--keep you opponent at a distance, generally, unless coming to grips gives you a definite advantage. The whole point of a staff is to keep the opponent away, IMO.

On a final note, this manual is from 1567...pretty late for most of the weapons pictured therein, and many scholars think that it contains a great deal of sport-advice instead of actual combat techniques. I don't know if that's true or not, but it's worth pointing out.

Good call pointing that out, either way.

Jake

[Lance D. Allen]

Having been taught the very basics of bo-staff, I've noted that the middle-hold technique is best used for defensive purposes. Both ends of the staff are available to block, and to strike if the opportunity presents itself. I would agree that holding it in the middle would definitely reduce the effective range of the weapon, but I think a lower DTN would be in order as well.

[Durgil]

They may defend well against another staff or some other mostly wooded weapon, but how long will they probably last against an opponent with a sword, particularly one of those big ones?  I know I'm going to hear about why would someone with a staff get into a fight with a guy using a greatsword, but sometimes you can't pick your battles and you just have to fight with what ever is at hand.  Has anyone thought up some realist weapon breakage rules yet that might cover this situation?

[Nick the Nevermet]

They may defend well against another staff or some other mostly wooded weapon, but how long will they probably last against an opponent with a sword, particularly one of those big ones?  I know I'm going to hear about why would someone with a staff get into a fight with a guy using a greatsword, but sometimes you can't pick your battles and you just have to fight with what ever is at hand.  Has anyone thought up some realist weapon breakage rules yet that might cover this situation?

For the makeshift weapon stuff, it wouldn't be hard: to try really hard to parry, he over-powers with more successes, I'd say that probably meant the defending weapon broke.

As for the very different situation of a guy proficient with a quarterstaff versus a guy with a big sword... well, thats REALLY different.  First off, yes, I would say the guy with the sword has a weapon advantage (probably).  I mean, its sharp and stuff :)  However, things aren't hopeless for the guy with the stick.  I don't have any experience with western martial arts, but I do have experience with aikido, which 'thinks' in terms of being unarmed, armed with a jo (4' long staff), armed with a katana.  

I don't pretend to know a lot or be a master of anything, but I do know you can parry a sword with a wooden staff with out it automatically shattering.  If you 'parried' the way people do in movies (basically whack the weapon coming at you really hard), then yeah, it'd break.  However, that ISN'T how parries work.  Parries (at least in aikido) are more about guiding the weapon away from you than whacking it back where it came from.  So, lessay a blade is coming down at my head.  A parry would involve stepping to oneside, ducking & leaning a bit, and putting the jo up at an angle so that if contact occurs, it won't be directly on the edge of the blade, and the sword with skip down it.

I offer this as an example of how to parry a sword with a stick.  Its not western, but I'd imagine a western style would do something similar.  The basic point is a parry guides an attacking weapon one way as you move another.

As I said, its not aan equal situation, but it isn't hopeless.

[Jake Norwood]

They may defend well against another staff or some other mostly wooded weapon, but how long will they probably last against an opponent with a sword, particularly one of those big ones?  I know I'm going to hear about why would someone with a staff get into a fight with a guy using a greatsword, but sometimes you can't pick your battles and you just have to fight with what ever is at hand.  Has anyone thought up some realist weapon breakage rules yet that might cover this situation?

Wow, this is going to shock a few folks, but Master George Silver claimed the staff as the best all-around weapon (as opposed to the welsh hook, his favorite, or the cut-and-thrust sword, which the great majority of his writing is on). He said (paraphrased) in "Paradoxes of Defense" that a single man with a "staff of convenient length" (TROS short staff...8' long) could take on two men of equal skill with swords and win easily. The staff is in many ways a superior weapon to the sword, depending on uses.

Likewise, as to staffs breaking...it just wasn't a common thing. I've got a 1.25" thick 8' long hickory staff, and I'm sure that I could deflect (read: parry) hundreds of sword strikes with it. It could probably hold up to several dozen blocks as well, if my technique was good.

If I had to enter a real fight against a sword, give me the big stick, regardless of whether I've trained for years with the sword and months with the staff.

Jake

[Thirsty Viking]

Wow, this is going to shock a few folks, but Master George Silver claimed the staff as the best all-around weapon (as opposed to the welsh hook, his favorite, or the cut-and-thrust sword, which the great majority of his writing is on). He said (paraphrased) in "Paradoxes of Defense" that a single man with a "staff of convenient length" (TROS short staff...8' long) could take on two men of equal skill with swords and win easily. The staff is in many ways a superior weapon to the sword, depending on uses.

Likewise, as to staffs breaking...it just wasn't a common thing. I've got a 1.25" thick 8' long hickory staff, and I'm sure that I could deflect (read: parry) hundreds of sword strikes with it. It could probably hold up to several dozen blocks as well, if my technique was good.

If I had to enter a real fight against a sword, give me the big stick, regardless of whether I've trained for years with the sword and months with the staff.
Jake

I've heard these things before...  Makes me believe that though the fight starts at extended length...  it gets to a midle grip as the swordsmen, or the remaining swordsman closes in.   I'd love to watch him beat the crap out of a couple of god swordmen to see how he does it though.

I just got back from reading his comments.... A most interesting piece of work.  I highly recomend anyone looking at half-poling to read that link.  It evens describes how he'd defeat 2 swordsmen without shields.  You are right,  he never even comments on a middle grip staff.  weather this was unworthy of comment because it was included by default, or universally scoffed at is interesting to debate, but not conclusive.  He does however state that having only a foot of staff behind the rear hand doesn't restict normal methods of use...  this would be a good figure for half-poling in general I think.

Last item on the topic....  even if quarter staff fighting was only viewed as a sport using walking sticks...   It wouldn't be the first time that peasants disguised martial training as recreational activity.  This would give them an excuse to carry a weapon capeable of being used to defeat most swords of the time...  according to the master...  if thier staff was longer than the sword..  they'd have the vantage if they used it as a short staff.
Using it in a RH grip..  (not twirling)  would be a typical starting hand position while walking (reflex role for 0 activation time)  The twirling,  if any, Could be a training excersize to strengthen your grip,  and learn to shift it easily and surely on the staf.  Anyway,  an intriguing line of thought as to how it descended into our modern perceptions.