FinalHavenLarp.com

Fighting skill with a shield should not determine whether a shield is the correct size for the person. Not fair to good fighters in my opinions.

The one on one fight is however to determine whether the person can fight safely with a shield is good idea. Actually 2 or 3 on 1 is better to make sure when the pc is under duress they still fight safely instead of losing their head because their Pc is about to die.

Me and some other people made pikes and greatswords so NPC's would have a better variety of cool things to kill us with, and challenge us a little more in a fight without having to up their stats. It's more fun to fight a variety of different fighting styles then the same ol' two claw monster.

i dont think it should be a pc fighting and npc to determine shield legality, but that it would work better if two gm's paired off to check all shields ingame before this next event, that way we have a static oppinion from the two gm's that will check every shield so there isnt anyone saying that one person signed off on it when another didnt. it keeps things fair and leaves it to a specific group of people to judge shield viability.

The player using the shield is just as important (probably more important) than the shield, itself. GMs using a PCs shield in test combat just won't do. The obvious case is a massive GM checking the shield of a tiny PC (or vise versa).

Dallid wrote:If the shield is as wide as the shoulders, then the sword arm is not vulnerable when the player is not attacking, and the shins require a unsafe lunging attack to hit if the attacker is using a weapon shorter than a pike or pole arm. So I'd consider a shield that leaves only the sword arm and shins 'vulnerable' as offering 100% coverage.

This has been exactly my point in all of the shield discussions. Hence why I will always use a safe wrap and think taking wrapping out of the game is ridonkulous.

Aaron how do you make having a shield that requires no IG skills to have and being disarmed a negative? That's the BEST scenario.

Having your weapon disarmed with or with out shield just sucks. Yes the shield helps protect you if you are disarmed, butin the end the person who disarmed you will just beat the snot of you with or with out a shield. Escipicaly if you are trying to get your weapon back!

Speaking of wrapping and the whole hitting the back scenario while in front of someone. Had a thought of using the direction of the attacker as your point of reference versus the actual hit. If you are in front of me, you are attacking my front, regardless of where you hit. This would make hold ground slightly better but it would end 90% of the "I hit you in the back", "No you didn't" arguments.

As for shield size, I'm still on the whole look at it in a case by case basis. Nelkie's shield is probably a little big for instance since even I'm forced to go shield to shield and just trade blows to get around it.

Or I'm I just that good Reid

Yeah, My shield is at the possible max size the rules allow so, yes, it's big. I also have it curving back to give me even more protection and i made it from a super light material. The design is granting me the most protection possible from a shield. But even that does not prevent me from taking damage.

I agree with Reid. It is case by case. Maybe the rules should change to have the shield sizes from shoulder to knees and shourlder to shoulder minus 1-2 inches. That littel bit would help.

I'd agree that Nelkie and Vince's sheilds offer 100% coverage for them and would recommend trimming a few inches off both length and width.

Isn't Vince's actually smaller than Aaron's? Vince's benfit has nothing to do with shield size, but rather his freakishly long arms.

Do different size #s need to be made for center grip shields? They have huge advantage in a larp since you add a forearm's length to the distance between you and the shield without the real life issue of lessened stability.

I kinda find it funny that I have had the same shield for 5-6 years as a PC and just now it's size is being questioned after I NPC'ed with it. Hmmm Interesting

I have to agree that my shield offers oppimial protection escipicaly since I have used it for so long. It is part of my body. And I noticed I tend to fight with my shield extended as far forward as possible which offers me even more protection.

And center grip shield offer's even more protection if used properly and the user has strong arms.

As side note: both Vince's and my shields legal in the current FH rules. What makes them so nasty is I made them extremly light which makes them very easy to handle and block incoming attacks. This could not be done with heavier materials. I have also curved the sides to give more protection from the sides. Yes, I designed them for the best protection possible!

So it is not all in the shield sizes, but also in the design and materials which can lead to how effective shields can be. And not to mention how trained the person is with sword and board. Vince and I have been doing this for years and both have martial art training on top of that. So yes, we are extremly effective with shields and in combat in general.

So the bottom line question is, what is truely driving this shield discussion if this has not been a big issues for 5+ years?

Shield size is coming up again as it has a few times. The first time around I had the same concerns and have always thought that the legal shield size is a little too big at FH.

I think you're going to have the I hit your back arguments no matter what. If you base it on where the person is attacking from then you have the sides that are always going to be questionable and if you leave it as where the blow lands then you have the attacker thinking they landed a back hit.

I think the shield sizes in the rules are fine.

as far as actual resolution goes, i think the practical way to solve this is that the gm's need to be more strict on policing shield size from event to event. same goes for weapons, its takes all of 10 seconds to check a weapon and it should be done every event.