Yup, but I think that in the RW (as modern world
compared to ancient world) all people need to be older
than their fictionary or medieval counterpart just to
learn a job.
XXI century experts (in any discipline) are older than
XI century ones or Gloranthan ones, IMO.
See at what Alexander the Great did in his youth.
We now have sport athlets who are very young but would
you commit an entire nation/empire to people like an
NBA player or a soccer Star?
Me not.
> It takes a minimum of 10 years intensive study to
> really learn
> swordplay,
Even if your daily life depends on it?
C'mon, I don't think D'Artagnan practiced for 10 years
before joining his three fellows.
In fiction and in the ancient world (IMO) people had
to learn much faster than nowadays. Else they would
not grow older at all.
> and the people who seriously train
> western swordsmanship
> these days* usually expect to be "deadlier" with
> their blade(s) at the
> age of sixty than when thirty.
This reminds me of a Novel I read: the Lost Prince. A bad novel, IMO, but a character impressed me: Istvan the Archer was a 60yo swordsman and he was more skilled than his younger rival (Martos IIRC). Why? Because he was more cynic.
> Though parhaps you meant sword = devotee of Humakt.
yes, that was my intention.
Ciao,
Gian
Powered by hypermail