B&C (RQ Rules)

From: James Frusetta <gerakkag_at_wam.umd.edu>
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 11:39:41 -0500 (EST)


Nick Effingham writes:
>IMG I would most defintely interpret this as an attack on the enemy
>weapon rather than a parry against the enemy weapon. Ergo, not a parry.
Whoops --- I never adopted the RQ3 disarm rules, still use the RQ2 ones. Ya, wouldn't count as a parry technique under the unmodified rules.

Historical use? I'm pretty sure the German use was a ball & chain/large shield combo. Romanian peasants, at least, occasionally made home-made flails and wooden ball and chain "things" (don't know better how to describe them -- sort of a spikey club tied to a staff with leather thongs) during peasant uprisings, but I don't think they usually parried with them -- more like "Let's all whack that knight over there at once, he can't hit more than one of us."

Were B&Cs ever actually used widely? Seems like a good all-metal warhammer or pick is a better parrying weapon, gives you better armor penetration, easier to make, etc. Just curious. I know they were used, but not how common they were.

Jim Bickmeyer describes deflection better than I can -- for a longer (2H) length of chain, you could probably spin a length in a regular circle, and try to snag/deflect the incoming weapon. Might give better coverage than a figure eight. There's something similar in quarterstaff fighting, I believe -- spinning the staff rapidly to deflect incoming blows, and build up speed for a strike.

And on two-weapon use: I believe paired cestus/fighting claws were sometimes used, too. And I know someone who swears by paired sai, and nunchaku are used in pairs. But these are all short/small weapons, of course, and not necessarily used on the battlefield.

James Frusetta


Powered by hypermail