*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by Fusionaut.

Historically Accurate Viking Swordfight Choreographer is a hell of a niche profession.

That's cool, but to an eye trained on Hollywood battles, it ends up looking like it devolves into a girly slapfight. I think it is the very active use of the shields -- it just looks weird compared to expectations (expectations based on fake Hollywood choreography, but expectations nonetheless).

I took a fencing class in college. One thing that we talked about there was the fact that as fencing developed into a sport with points scored for "touches" as opposed to actual to-the-death or injury duels, it changed some of the tactics and allowed for variations even though the "intent" was to emulate the real deal in a fully realistic way.

If you watch high-level fencing, the participants are usually very aggressive. That is for a good reason -- high aggression usually results in more scored touches/points over time. But we're talking aggregate; over many many matches with many many participants, being more aggressive is usually better in terms of total points scored. However, that ignores the fact that if you participated in actual duels with non-blunted weapons with that same level of aggression, you might be slightly more likely to kill your first (, second, third ...) opponent, but you would also be more likely to get yourself killed. The tactics and approach are altered as a consequence of using blunted/nonlethal weapons as opposed to "shit gets real" tools of war.

As much as we might try to emulate the "real deal", I suppose that it can't be 100% authentic without authentic consequences (which is obviously impossible).

*history

Adding video to channels (History) - requested by hpqp.

I knew strafing had its place in real life.

I wish I had this information two nights ago at Pizza Hut.

>> ^MilkmanDan:

If you watch high-level fencing, the participants are usually very aggressive. That is for a good reason -- high aggression usually results in more scored touches/points over time. But we're talking aggregate; over many many matches with many many participants, being more aggressive is usually better in terms of total points scored. However, that ignores the fact that if you participated in actual duels with non-blunted weapons with that same level of aggression, you might be slightly more likely to kill your first (, second, third ...) opponent, but you would also be more likely to get yourself killed. The tactics and approach are altered as a consequence of using blunted/nonlethal weapons as opposed to "shit gets real" tools of war.

I know next to nothing about fencing, but I watched it in the olympics out of interest, and I found myself thinking a lot of the strikes put the attacker in a really dangerous position if the swords were real. Good to know I was on the right track.

>> ^MilkmanDan:


As much as we might try to emulate the "real deal", I suppose that it can't be 100% authentic without authentic consequences (which is obviously impossible).


pffsh! Away with your defeatist attitude. Both participants sign waivers, we give them pointy swords and armour and hold it somewhere with a relaxed attitude to health and safety, like Indonesia, Zimbabwe or Texas.

Would be interesting in future to see combat sports eventually go virtual, with a matrix style environment that allows for no holds barred combat without an arbitrary victory condition.

>> ^MilkmanDan:
If you watch high-level fencing, the participants are usually very aggressive. That is for a good reason -- high aggression usually results in more scored touches/points over time. But we're talking aggregate; over many many matches with many many participants, being more aggressive is usually better in terms of total points scored. However, that ignores the fact that if you participated in actual duels with non-blunted weapons with that same level of aggression, you might be slightly more likely to kill your first (, second, third ...) opponent, but you would also be more likely to get yourself killed. The tactics and approach are altered as a consequence of using blunted/nonlethal weapons as opposed to "shit gets real" tools of war.

Isn't high level fencing aggressive because it doesn't matter if your opponent hits you as long as you hit them first? That sort of scoring system seems to naturally favor the one with the aggression and initiative.

>> ^mentality:
Isn't high level fencing aggressive because it doesn't matter if your opponent hits you as long as you hit them first? That sort of scoring system seems to naturally favor the one with the aggression and initiative.


Generally yes, it doesn't matter if your opponent hits you as long as you hit them first. There are "right of way" rules to establish who has the initiative and the right to attack, and in fencing as a sport there are actually judges to make rulings on whether or not a touch should be thrown out because the attacker didn't have the right of way. It can get confusing.

Basically, whoever attacks first takes the right of way, but their opponent can take it back by successfully making a parry. It gets gray when both people attack at nearly the same time, their swords/foils/whatever touch but not enough to deflect a touch, and both attacks hit. Usually they wear vests with sensors to light up and say who got hit first, but I think a judge can overrule that if they think that the person that got hit first had tried to parry/riposte the original attack.

I'd tend to say that just further explains my stance that it can't really be "realistic"; if it were an actual duel we wouldn't need judges and electric vests to say that person A or B touched first and therefore "won". Instead, they'd both be dead and we could safely say they both lost.

@ChaosEngine: Exactly what I was thinking -- let's make shit real in virtual reality.

The Princess Bride - Behind the Scenes Swordfighting has been added as a related post - related requested by kulpims on that post.