>> It takes a minimum of 10 years intensive study to really learn >> swordplay, and the people who seriously train western swordsmanship >> these days* usually expect to be "deadlier" with their blade(s) atthe age of sixty than when thirty.
Mike Dawson (excerpts) ...
> And even in modern, western fencing if what you said was true, then
> the World and Olympic fencing championships would be dominated by old
> men and women, not folks in their college years and a bit beyond.
...
> In essence, there is a war between these two things:
> 1 "Age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill."
> 2 "My knees hurt."
It seems to me that there's a lot more scope for experience and treachery on the battlefield or in adventuring situations than there is in a formal duel or an Olympic contest.
I'm reminded of a Western I once saw, classic plot where the aging lawman has to persuade the townsfolk to fight off an attack by outlaws. In the climactic fight all the usual cliches are to be seen such as the townsman firing from a roof until he gets hit and falls into the street. Meanwhile the lawman is moving through the back alleys, taking shots at the outlaws as he can, and the enemy never actually spotted him at all. It's a lot easier to survive a fight that way!
I suppose a Humakti duel is somewhere in between. You have to face a single opponent on an agreed duelling ground, but there's no limit on using obscure magic or throwing a concealed dagger as soon as the start signal is given.
Andrew
Powered by hypermail