Matt Jennings writes:
>Don't forget that one of the most important factors in the different styles
>(Eastern vs Dragaerian) is the stance.
>Vlad uses the 'modern' side stance, which exposes little of his body. This
>means he can parry/attack with one hand while using his other to do
>his little tricks. (throw knives, shurikens, etc...)
>Khaavren et al use a full-face stance, meaning they usually need a poinard to
>defend that side of their body.
It actually goes the other way -- smallsword fencers tend to use a somewhat
more extreme stance, since the smallsword is fast enough that fencing
tends to get a bit linear (and in 18th century duels, off-hand weapons
-tended- to be discouraged, though they were certainly used for both
fencing and self defense; it also helps that the speed difference
between an off-hand weapon and a smallsword is -much- less than that
between a dagger and a rapier or heavier weapon; this means that it
doesn't improve your defense nearly as much); a slightly less extreme
(ie, 45 degree) stance is much more defensive, since you've got better three
dimensional movement and can bring an off-hand or off-hand weapon into
play (and can do a stesso-tempo attack by parrying with the dagger,
rather than having to oppose with your blade while moving your body
enough that your point is also attacking; something that's very
good...but very hard). Basically, like the style, the stance comes
>from the weapon and the best way to use it, not the other way around.
Earlier weapons, incidentally, tended to use an off-side-fowrward
stance and attack on the pass (by crossing your feet, ending
sword-side forward) rather than the lunge (a big step with your
sword-side foot, which started forward); I don't know enought about
this style of fighting to speak about it with authority, but I get the
impression that this was because of an even greater reliance on stesso
tempo (thus the counter-attack on the pass would force your opponent
to commit to their action and give you a better chance of success on
counterattack) and circular action. [rapier fencing involved attacks
on both the pass and the lunge; smallsword generally only involved
attacks on the lunge or step, since circular actions were somewhat
less important]
>I think that most of the duel/fighting descriptions in PG and 500ya do a good
>job of showing how both hands (poinard & sword) are generally used for attack
>and defense in the Dragaerian style. That is, except for Bruce Le... excuse
>me, Aerich.
Hmm. I need to re-read 500 years after.
>Khaavren does seem to exhibit the mentality of an epee fencer (which
>if memory serves is what skzb himself said he used to do) in that he
>won't necessarily go for the kill, but contents himself with making
>little hits & scratches, until his opponnent makes a mistake or gets
>frustrated.
This actually feels very sabre-like (and we do know that Vlad does
sabre as well as whatever art he calls "rapier") -- go for the kill if
it's offered, but strike the closest and easiest available target.
Actually, Silver (English shortsword, 1600's) recommends something
similar -- a quick stop-cut on an oponent's advance, followed by
stepping back; mind, with his weapon a quick cut could easily disable
an opponent, but still...
>In the Vlad books, it is more difficult to see how he does what he
>does... but then Vlad cheats.
He does seem to use a fair number of stop-cuts to the extremities,
combined with lunges.
I'm actually surprised, given the strength advantage, that none of
Vlad's opponents have closed and gripped -- it seems to very well fit
the styles they use, and would likely be fairly effective if he didn't
have a dagger on hand at the time (but that's the trick, isn't it?).
--
Joshua Kronengold (mneme at io.com) "I've been teaching |\ _,,,--,,_ ,)
--^--him...to live, to breathe, to walk, to sample the /,`.-'`' -, ;-;;'
/\\joy on each road, and the sorrow at each turning. |,4- ) )-,_ ) /\
/-\\\I'm sorry if I kept him out too late"--Vlad Taltos '---''(_/--' (_/-'