Dead Leg Rule

[Physic]

Since Im complaining about rules I might as throw this one out there as another that I cant stand.

I think that if you skillfully have hit your opponent in the leg and he goes down to his knee he should not gain a defensive advantage with the dead leg rule. There are many reasons why this rule is just plain bad.

Safety is a major reason why this rule is not good. You are not doing your knees any favors by pivoting around with all your body weight planted on one knee.

You have a defensive advantage when you become legged. In a one vs. one fight if I become legged I can go to the ground and cover all target areas with an average size shield. Since I no longer have to worry about the dead leg I can sit back and wait for my opponent to come to me.

It is a very annoying rule to explain to new fighters and creates complication. This rule could be made much simpler, create a proper disadvantage and allow people to fight on there knees in more comfortable and safer positions.

There is no reason when you hit someone in the leg and they go to there knees that you should not be able to target it again for the second limb death. It works that way with arms and it should be the same for legs. This is another of the rules that makes me cringe each time I have to explain it to a beginning fighter. It makes no sense and creates more complications in our rules.

[Cyric]

So what do you suggest, then? Hit to a dead leg carries through? I think the Arm then body rule makes sense, since the two are close together. If my dead leg is out, and i get struck on the thigh straight down, how can that be justified as carring through to my body or other leg?

I also don't think the defensive advantage you gain by being legged is that overwhelming. The standing person still has a better angle to swing down on the person, and the legged fighter is less mobile, and more able to be kicked/bashed/edged over.

[Mekoot Rowan]

While I understand where you're coming from on this, I think this is another area where no fix is needed. Half of what you're proposing is already covered by the both knees down rule. Realistically it makes some sense that if your good leg is back and out of the way it shouldn't be able to be injured.

While your point about knees has validity, anyone who is that concerned about it could certainly take death when hit in a leg. Or they could just do what most fighters do and get knee pads.

You are correct about the defensive advantage. I've seen a number of people who, once legged were nearly unkillable. Sir Tybalt with his wide heater shield is a prime example of this.

The thing is that what you gain in defense you lose in offesive capability. Your mobility is essentially zero, allowing whoever you're fighting to leave you helpless while the fighting moves on to another part of the field. It's what makes 'gimp and go' such an effective field strategy.

You're also ignoring the fact that not everyone has a shield. Does a florentiner gain an advantage once legged? How about a spearman or a glaive? I think you know the answer.


If we're going to fix something about legs, I think we should focus on eliminating the duck walk or magic leg switch which allows people to choose which leg they want to have injured. The current philosophy seems to be that it doesn't matter which leg is down so long as one of them is. This lets people slide across the field very quickly (aproximately the speed of a fast walk). Some people, especially former wrestlers it seems, are quite good at it, allowing them to sneak attack people while legged when those people weren't expecting them to move that fast.

The thing is that this seems to be technically against the rules, but it's a creative interpretation that has been allowed for years. We keep allowing it just because 'that's the way it's always been done' without considering how it might be hurting the realism of our game.

Explaining how that works to new people is even more complicated than trying to tell them how being legged works.

[Elebrim]

There is no reason when you hit someone in the leg and they go to there knees that you should not be able to target it again for the second limb death. It works that way with arms and it should be the same for legs.

It works that way with arms because the two are literally immediately next to each other. Arm behind back, get hit in the dead arm, the arm doesn't exist so it goes to the body. It doesn't work for legs because if the leg is actively moving around, the two are not immediately conjoined. It does work, however, if the active leg is down, because then the two are immediately next to each other and a shot would feasibly pass through.

I don't think this needs fixing, either.

[Physic]

It works that way with arms because the two are literally immediately next to each other. Arm behind back, get hit in the dead arm, the arm doesn't exist so it goes to the body. It doesn't work for legs because if the leg is actively moving around, the two are not immediately conjoined. It does work, however, if the active leg is down, because then the two are immediately next to each other and a shot would feasibly pass through.

I don't think this needs fixing, either.

This only brings up a point of realism that to me again makes no sense. If I hack off your leg on a battle field you would be dead.

Obviously this rule does not need to be changed I just feel that it is a rule that complicates things and is just plain silly. I fight in an area where we constantly have new people joining us and each time I have to explain this rule it creates confusion. To me if a new person has to ask what is the point of a rule and I cant give them a good answer, there is something wrong. Telling them they are fighting on an imaginary leg stump just doesn't cut it for me.

When I hit someone in the arm in a fight I gain a distinct advantage. That advantage is much less if I leg them. Most people can still fight very well while they are on there knees. Skill in hitting your opponent should outweigh game mechanics that attempt ,and fail, to create realism.

I certainly don't foresee this rule to get changed. In my opinion this is just another rule that, while it does work, could be improved upon.

[Kyrian]

How about the HACS leg rule?

http://belegarth.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=19741

I know it's not how we've done things in the past but honestly if it's going to help our members (reducing the amount of bad knees due to falling and moving on them) and decreases confusion (hit a leg-no weight on it, second shot death), isn't it worth considering?

[Mekoot Rowan]

How about halfway in between?

We keep the leg on ground rule, but allow people to drag if they want to. If you're standing then it's just the same thing as having both knees down.

If you can drag it, you can * well just sit on it.

[Aegis]

the points I dont get,

If youre swinging thru a dead leg, there sure is potential to hit the other leg.

cause I guarantee that when I HACK your leg off, you arent gonna put the stump on the ground and put your good leg behind you. you would have to use it to have any ability to pivot and balance dictates that you would also have to keep it under you, directly under, thus a blow where a leg isnt, would travel thru.

Ask anyone whose broken a leg or foot if they run around on it.

how would someone duckwalk with a hacked off leg? im sorry shock from stump ground at high speed over and over= lights out...

anyways, if your other legs outta the way, then your torsos on the ground by logics standpoint, you should die.


PS. Im drunk so forgive the grammar etc.

[Arrakis]

Did the playtesting from the last discussion regarding the HACS leg rule ever go anywhere? Do we have those peoples' experience to draw on?

Or should we draft some new options and start some playtesting groups?

[Mekoot Rowan]

the points I dont get,

If youre swinging thru a dead leg, there sure is potential to hit the other leg.

there is, but hopefull you're going to be protecting it. As was mentioned before, the rules are the way they are for playability, not realism.

cause I guarantee that when I HACK your leg off, you arent gonna put the stump on the ground and put your good leg behind you. you would have to use it to have any ability to pivot and balance dictates that you would also have to keep it under you, directly under, thus a blow where a leg isnt, would travel thru.

Unless your leg wasn't hacked off, but only injured like it is in the HACS rule. Then you could sit on your bad leg and stick the other out for balance. this puts it effectively out of harms way.

Ask anyone whose broken a leg or foot if they run around on it.

Funny you should say that, because I was actually talking to a guy the other day about how he broke his tibia during a game of football and went through three days of practice after it before a trainer saw him limping down a hall and told him that it was probably a bone injury and not a muscle strain.

However, if someone were to have a broken femur, I think you're right about not running and probably not walking. As with most injuries, not all broken legs are the same.

how would someone duckwalk with a hacked off leg? im sorry shock from stump ground at high speed over and over= lights out...

I agree, this is one of the most ludicrous rule cheesings that we let everyone get away with. I'm not saying I haven't done it myself, it was cheesy when I did it too.

anyways, if your other legs outta the way, then your torsos on the ground by logics standpoint, you should die.

Again, playability, not realism

PS. Im drunk so forgive the grammar etc.

I'm gonna guess that your BAC was slightly higher or lower than .09. While grammar was imperfect it was all pretty easy to understand.



Like Arrakis I'm interested in hearing from someone who has played a bunch with the HACS rule and what they though of it.

[Peregrine]

Did the playtesting from the last discussion regarding the HACS leg rule ever go anywhere? Do we have those peoples' experience to draw on?

Or should we draft some new options and start some playtesting groups?

I have found that works well with my gym class. but sometimes we use a pivot rule that you have to keep one foot planted like in basketball.

[Mekoot Rowan]

Your gym class has belegarth style fighting? What kind of educational Mecca do you teach at?

[Peregrine]

Bible Baptist Christian Academy. Soon to be Romeoville Christian Academy.

[savetuba]

I'm confused... If I were to use a spear to stab someone in the leg, they stay on that leg. Then if I stab them again in the same leg or in the other leg they can still stand there? And then suppose after stabbing both legs I stab high, pushing they guy off balance. When on a knee they usually fall back and open up a side or an arm to be stabbed, but this guy will just take one of his stabbed legs and correct the imbalance by placing it behind him. So now he can't move after me, though we all know he will rotate in place.

It seems this rule would be detrimental to stabbers.

[Arrakis]

Savetuba, the HACS rules are that you can die by being stabbed in two limbs and that a hit to an injured leg counts as your second limb hit.

[savetuba]

But if we were to apply that to belegarth a person with 2 stabbed limbs still has an edge over stabies.

[Arrakis]

Savetuba, in that case, two stabbed limbs would be death.

I don't really understand what you're asking.

[Aegis]

in the HACS rule, your dead leg is not invincible.

[MagnusofDregoth]

Yes, that point has already been made, but I'm not sure HACS is still around, anyway, so this isn't a huge issue.

[Mekoot Rowan]

I really don't think we should change the way we play the knee on ground rule. I do think that we should change legged movement though.

Like I said before, there is too much 'duck walking' going on.

We wouldn't even need to change the rules to prevent it, just enforce what is already there.