Hally Style Questions

[Froste]

I have built the Sexecutioner! (see the Humor forum for the story behind the name)

It's longer than 7', or I would have two striking surfaces. The "haft" end is over 18" and well padded for safety.

So, I have this big striking surface, and this other big non-striking surface. Is it legal to manipulate someone else's shield/body/weapon with the non-striking surface to set up strikes?

Is it legal to use the non-striking surface to unbalance an opponent by hooking legs or something similar, to introduce them to the ground?

Do those who have used large polearms have suggestions for techniques, practice drills, and the like beyond what's posted on a certain website about fighting with glaives?

=================edit======================

Thanks for the responses! May I ask as to the reason for the rule aganist a 7' + weapon having two ends with striking surfaces? Mine is built in such a way as to be able to safely strike with either side (though one looks like a striking hally blade and one looks like 18" of barrel mace head)

[Kegg]

Thoughtful question. I am going to give an opinion, but this is by no means definitive.

Intentionally striking with a non-striking surface is against the spirt (and probably letter) of the rule. Non-striking surfaces are padded for incidental contact.

What you are describing is intentional contact.

Several concerns with the weapon are

1.) Your opponent can not tell whether he was struck with a actual or incidental striking surface.

2.) The rules outlawed pommel striking for a reason (fist too close to attack). While this probably is safe, it is against the spirit of the rules.

As far as entangling your opponent with your pole arm. It happens. People block with the haft of spears all the time. Spears thrust between legs and cause people to fall down. The question is, whether this is intentional or not. It is illegal to use a spear to trip some one, but if they happen to fall while dodging your spear attack, every thing is cool.

I realize this is a long response (you asked several novel questions). If you wish to follow up on this, just edit your original post (marking the addition as an edit).

[Kyrax]

Tripping and hooking your opponents legs are a bad idea. To start with, you're using a non-striking surface to make contact with them. Second, as with anything else in this game, you are responsible for the consequences of your actions: When you trip your opponent you have no control over what happens to them as they fall. I would strongly recommend against this tactic.

Well, that article is getting old, as is its author. The best advice I can give is to practice using your weapon in all kinds of circumstances. Try it one-handed, fighting from your knees, fighting from within a press of fighters, and so on. Practice fighting with either hand to the rear - I'm very right-handed, but to stay alive I often wield my polearms left-handed.

Pay attention to your hand positions and to your footwork. Your feet can help keep you out of trouble or move you into range of the opponent. Get used to how differently the weapon moves when you've choked up higher on the shaft or when you're fighting from down near the end.

The last bit of advice I can give you is to set up a pell, a practice target. It must be padded, to cut down on wear and tear on your weapon as well as on your hands, wrists, elbows and shoulders. The other reason to practice with a pell padded like a shield is that you need to be able to use the rebound of your weapon off of the opponent or their shield to help set up your next swing.

[Kyrax]

So, I have this big striking surface, and this other big non-striking surface. Is it legal to manipulate someone else's shield/body/weapon with the non-striking surface to set up strikes?

Oh, and as for this - I use my polearm or spear shaft to "manipulate" (push) against shields all of the time. However, it is not legal to do this on your opponent's body, for the same reasons as Kegg cited.

Blocking or deflecting weapons with your polearm shaft is cool too - as long as it isn't the person (or their armor), you are okay.

[Kegg]

The reasons against two-ended weapons.

1.) Safety. It was meant to outlaw pommel striking. People would just keep adding to the pommel until it was something else. A majority of war council did not like this. Thought it unsafe.

2.) Realism - Quaterstaves really are not a particularly lethal weapon against armored opponents. The evidence I use to support this is that the SCA polearms are pretty close to historical quarterstaves. They hit each other about full force, and yet no one dies (or rarely is even injured).

Because people still wanted to use the darn things, we made them Class I (blue). At the same time we didn't want people to say... "It's not a quaterstave, it is dual end sword.... its a Sexecutioner", when pretty much all it is, is a odd looking quarterstave. So we pretty much made all double ended weapons look like quarterstaves if that is how they were to be fought with.