| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Raven
Loch Salann,
262 Posts |
 Posted - 05/24/2007 : 11:58:02 AM
|
This came up yesterday, and I thought it would be an interesting topic to discuss. I thought of putting it in the “ask a knight” section but I wanted to get everyone’s input on the subject so I placed it here.
What’s more important, honor or winning?
Is it better to win gloriously or die trying, or is it better to use whatever means are necessary to achieve your goal?
For instance your 3 man unit is chasing down someone who is having a good day. The three of you have easily routed his attempts to single you out and take you one on one. You charge and he trips and falls. Do you (a) kill him “dead on the ground” or (b) allow him to rise by your good graces and fight on.
My thought is that you should let him up knowing that you intend to pursue him. This way honor is gained by both sides. He’s not going to sit around the fire telling stories of how some guy killed him on the ground but he’ll tell the story of how he held off the group of three guys until he fell, then they showed a great deal of chivalry buy allowing him to regain his feet and then, commenced killing him.
What do you think?
Raven MacLeod
Esquire
En fides abunde virtus, en virtus abunde fides. |
|
|
Virgil Morgenstern
Loch Salann,
Artemisia
53 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 12:52:14 PM
|
I saw said occurrence take place as i was explaining the art of heavy combat melee style to a new person. When Raven fell, a glaive was placed upon his breast and the call for dead on the ground could be heard. As this is good training for the several new fighters this was a learning expirience that could have been helpful for fighting. IMHO however as the odds were three to one against the grounded bird, I feel the honor in letting him rise would have far exceeded the glory of winning even if he proceeded to anihilate then each in turn. Dont get me wrong that I love to beat an opponent better than me, but due to simply tripping when he was outnumbered? I say let him stand and if he trips again, then dead on the ground.
Loyal to the End, Honest to a Fault, The Morning Star is ever unfailing. |
 |
|
|
bart
Côte du Ciel,
Artemisia
386 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 1:13:06 PM
|
Sean quote: "Do you want to win, or do you want to get better?"
|
|
|
|
Morejello
One Thousand Eyes,
Artemisia
407 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 2:45:17 PM
|
I guess I'll jump into this with an alternate perspective:
Which option gives me the most fun?
Which would be more fun for me, DoG the guy who tripped, or let him get up and continue the fight? With extremely few exceptions, the latter.
I'm fighting someone of a lower skill level, and I leg them. I have a reasonable level of confidence that I can handily beat them if I remain standing, but if I take my own leg it will be more of a challenge. Which will be more fun? taking my leg, of course. Conversely, I'm fighting someone who is very good, and I leg them. Will it be a challenge (and therefore fun) to fight them if I remain standing? Heck yeah, so I do so.
I generally find that the fight that gives me the most fun, tends to also be the one that would be considered most honorable as well.
|
|
|
|
CormacmacRuadri
Sentinels Keep,
Artemisia
65 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 11:33:44 PM
|
Allow the gentlemen to regain his feet and continue the fun! I remember very clearly words that His grace Duk Basil told me at my squiring... "Honor above victory", from that moment on it is something I have tried to live by on the field.
To me honor is a very important part of what we do, btoh on and off the field.
K-mak
Squire to His Excellency Uggedei Bahadur Mighan Nidun
http://www.atlanordu.com
|
|
|
|
Sean
Barony of Loch Salann,
234 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2007 : 01:33:32 AM
|
I think this is something that has to be considered in the proper context. This particular situation occured at fighter practice. And at fighter practice there is something much more valuable to gained than Victory or Honor: Knowledge.
I don't remember this incident happening. So, I pressume that it happened after I had left. However, at a fighter practice, when one side has elimnated all but one of their oppenents while maintaing a significant numerical advantage, there is really no point in continuing the fight to the death.
Additionally, there is a great lesson to be learned by Raven remaining on the ground so that someone can learn what to do to someone in that situation.
Many of you do not remember the Great Desert Wars (aka Kitty Litter Wars), where people were getting pummeled while they were laying on their backs. "Barbaric" you say? Indeed. The Dead on the Ground rule was created as a matter of necessity for the safety of our sport. I had explained this rule to our newest fighter just last night at this very practice.
So, in this context I believe the best thing to do is to call the person dead on the ground. It's a matter a training and education than Victory or Honor.
In a large scale melee, I think it is still situational. Particularly when you are grossly outnumbered and every kill makes a difference. But more so when someone comes charging through your line trying to wreak as much havoc as possible and ends up stumbling at your feet. I will definitely call that dude dead on the ground.
Conversely, if I have a numerical advantage of a group of fighters and one of them trips over a dead body, I'm not going to go racing over to kill him on the ground before he gets up.
When a large melee force gets down to one guy, then it's just time for single combat.
While I would agree that we should consider honor before victory, let us not get to the point where those two concepts are mutually exclusive. One can certainly attain an Honorable Victory.
Sean
Dux Artemisia
It's not what you get.
It's what you become. |
|
|
|
Ralph
Loch Salann,
Artemisia
327 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2007 : 03:20:57 AM
|
I almost never call someone dead on the ground. And then, only for safety reasons,
Honor is the goal behind every victory. What do you hope to gain by winning? Honor.
Honor and Victory are not mutually exclusive, but neither are they identical. Honor can sometimes be won without Victory. Victory can sometimes be claimed with out Honor. An Honorable Victory is the best prize one can try for, and is the ultimate goal. But to me, an honorable defeat is far better than a Victory that brings shame ...
Victories will fade ("what have you won lately?") But Honor or Shame will live on and on and on...
---Ralph Rex Artemisia
--------------------
"bigoz e dranchiers!"
A French term of contempt for the Normans.
|
Edited by - Ralph on 05/25/2007 03:22:33 AM |
|
|
|
Niccolo
Angels,
Caid
122 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2007 : 07:26:56 AM
|
So far we've discussed the conduct of those who stand. What of the fallen one? As a rule, when I've lost my footing in combat, I'll eliminate myself, with the explanation that I have died of shame. 
Stance is a key fighting skill. If I lose my stance, am I not bested?
This does not contradict anything that precedes. As I see it, a key component of honor is willingness to give advantage in a situation where I would not take advantage.
Niccolo Gianfigliazzi Genovese, OP, OL, DWS
Abbastanza Buon Non E Abbastanza Buono |
|
|
|
Raven
Loch Salann,
262 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2007 : 08:30:00 AM
|
Wow this is great! I’d just like to say that event though it was a specific incident that got me thinking about this subject I wasn’t calling attention to any one deed. This is definitely a situational thing as has been pointed out. I was trying to practice staying alive against a hunting party as much as that hunting party was practicing, well… hunting. They did their job really really well, over and over again. 
What I really wanted to see is what other people thought about the subject and I have to say that it’s paid off really well.
Please add more, I’d like to see what others think…
Raven MacLeod
Esquire
En fides abunde virtus, en virtus abunde fides. |
|
|
|
LadyFish
Starleaf Gate,
Middle
1 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2007 : 08:41:43 AM
|
That question, to me, is one of "real world or play?"
In the real world, combat would be life or death. I would be punching my opponent on the nose with my knucklebows to make their eyes water and their nose bleed before I did anything else. Why? It gives me an advantage over them, becase they are trying to kill me, and I would want that advantage.
The SCA, well, that's not the real world, it's the play world. I will nearly always give points of honour, unless requested not to (which, yes, that happens occasionally). Why do I do this? Becasue at the end of the day, I'll be eating or drinking with them afterward and it's not going to matter afterward who I killed or didn't, unless, of course, bards are involved If my opponent loses his weapon or falls to the ground, I let him/her up first, or allow him/her to retrieve their weapon simply because I would want someone to do that for me if I was having an off day and being klutzy.
Being a marshal, the other consideration for me is safety. Since this is the play world, I don't want to see anyone hurt, or hurt someone myself, if I can avoid it. Bumps, bruises, accidents and the like happen. We've all got stories, I'm sure of it, but the idea is to minimize their occurance, and by practicing honour over victory, we get that much closer.
I am a member of the Inland Seas School of Defence, and our motto is "Rapier With Honour". It's on my favour, and on the field I live by it. If I'm in a melee and I get a questionable hit, I ask to redo it or just take it and go rez. It's not worth chancing them upping their calibration or me getting a reputation as a rhino-hider. When I'm at Pennsic War, the East and their allies are only opponents ON the field. It's like one of the charges the marshals give at the beginning "salute your most noble and worthy opponent." If they are noble and worthy, we should value honour over victory because at the end of the day, this is just for fun.
Fish
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Victory or Honor?
