Anviling verbage

[Daemarth]

I don't see any wording that uses anvil in our rules. Can someone please point out the anviling rule to me. I'm old and blind and can't seem to find it. I don't really think 3.7.3 and 3.7.4 really define what we used to use as rules, so is it anywhere else?

- Well I'm not all too good with words, and I think I can describe it well enough though. When I started way back in 2000, if your weapon got hit into a target area, even if it was a light hit, it counted as an anvil. Or if it got hit into a target area and the person's weapon also hit that area light it counted as an anvil. It didn't have to be laid across an area with direct contact which is how I read our rules now. I tried explaining this to a newer person last year and he thought I was nuts. The first thing he asked was "Where is that in the rules?"

So to me the rules now read as it's ok to get your weapons hit into you as long as they are not striking with the same force as an unhindered good hit from another player. If that is how we are playing it now then I would say the wording is ok, but if it's more like how we used to do it then I would think we should consider rewording it somehow... by someone that has higher English skills than mine

BUT... lol yes I have a but... that does account for weapons like down spears, that could be hit into your leg for example with any amount of force but it wouldn't count since it's a non striking surface (the haft) hitting you... and yes... I've seen this kind of cheese tried. Even people calling "flat" from their own sword hitting their legs and such, which is why we always played it as any part of the weapon hit into you, and even if it is light, to keep the "indestructibles" out of the game. I would like to hear thoughts about this.

[Derian]

I think 3.7.3 perfectly describes anviling:

3.7.3. Blocking a Weapon strike by laying a Weapon against a Target Area and/or Shield is illegal.

How would you phrase it?

[Slagar]

That's how I was taught. I honestly didn't know that the rules were ever interpreted differently. The rule of thumb I was taught was that "sufficient force" never changes, no matter what, and that includes anvilling. If your weapon hits hard enough to count, then it counts, otherwise it's "light", which also never changes (except for projectiles).

To be fair, I may very well be misinformed here, it wouldn't be the first time. Anyone else here play it differently than my group?

[Derian]

Yeah, I've always heard it and played it that if your weapon is pushed into your body (or shield/whatever), the strike does not count unless it retains sufficient force.

Basically what Slagar is saying - if the hit is solid, it should probably be taken, even if you partially blocked it. Now, for the sake of argument, if you take away just enough so that it doesn't have sufficient force, well, then that's a successful block, even if it still strikes you, because the shot no longer has sufficient force.

[Big King Jimmy]

I've always played that there has to be a weapon/object/body sandwich. They all have to be in contact at the same time. I'm not taking half swings because you felt you didn't need to follow through.

[Derian]

Since this is more of a discussion at this point, I'm going to move it so that more people can chime in.

[Soo Ma Tai]

Any stirke that hits with sufficient force is a hit....no matter if a weapon was in the way or not. If the strike does not connect with sufficient force, it is not a hit, unless you are anvilling before the shot ever connects (then you are just cheating).

[Thomas MacFinn]

Any stirke that hits with sufficient force is a hit....no matter if a weapon was in the way or not. If the strike does not connect with sufficient force, it is not a hit, unless you are anvilling before the shot ever connects (then you are just cheating).

I'm certainly not a veteran, but that is how I always interpreted it. The only addendum I would add is that a sheathed weapon should count the force of the blow as if the weapon wasn't there.

[Arrakis]

Is hand-on-weapon blocking of an arrow legal? Hand-on-weapon counts as part of the weapon, so I'd think not, but, then, you're getting hit in the hand, not the weapon.

[Thomas MacFinn]

Is hand-on-weapon blocking of an arrow legal? Hand-on-weapon counts as part of the weapon, so I'd think not, but, then, you're getting hit in the hand, not the weapon.

Sounds like a whole new thread.

[Derian]

I would say without question 'no'.

[Arrakis]

How about foot-on-ground?

[Big King Jimmy]

Hand on weapon is considered part of the weapon, if an arrow strikes a weapon it travels through to the target area behind it. I'd call arm as an archer.

[Derian]

Unless it was intentional, at which point a marshal should call you dead.

Foot on ground will never come up as intentional blocking. If an arrow hits a foot on ground, it's ground, same as with any other weapon.

[Satanaka]

Many people take this as a point of honor- goes with your personel honor I guess- If I was hit on my down foot by an arrow- I'd take a leg.

Unless it was intentional, at which point a marshal should call you dead.

Foot on ground will never come up as intentional blocking. If an arrow hits a foot on ground, it's ground, same as with any other weapon.

[Derian]

Why, it's clearly stated in the Book of War that a foot on ground counts as ground.

Do you also take accidental headshots as death? It's the same deal.

[Satanaka]

Most the "anvil" issues I have seen- stem from people laying a sword across shield so it can't get broke- or saying a 'sheathed' weapon blocked the blow.
I have had my sword hit hard enough to knock into me- I took the hit- BUT if it was light- the light. I have also seen the "long sword down behind round shield "Anvilling" against the leg like an unbreakable shield...
I have took death for hitting self in head just for stupidity and embarrasment


BTW- where you been old man?

I don't see any wording that uses anvil in our rules. Can someone please point out the anviling rule to me. I'm old and blind and can't seem to find it. I don't really think 3.7.3 and 3.7.4 really define what we used to use as rules, so is it anywhere else?

- Well I'm not all too good with words, and I think I can describe it well enough though. When I started way back in 2000, if your weapon got hit into a target area, even if it was a light hit, it counted as an anvil. Or if it got hit into a target area and the person's weapon also hit that area light it counted as an anvil. It didn't have to be laid across an area with direct contact which is how I read our rules now. I tried explaining this to a newer person last year and he thought I was nuts. The first thing he asked was "Where is that in the rules?"

So to me the rules now read as it's ok to get your weapons hit into you as long as they are not striking with the same force as an unhindered good hit from another player. If that is how we are playing it now then I would say the wording is ok, but if it's more like how we used to do it then I would think we should consider rewording it somehow... by someone that has higher English skills than mine

BUT... lol yes I have a but... that does account for weapons like down spears, that could be hit into your leg for example with any amount of force but it wouldn't count since it's a non striking surface (the haft) hitting you... and yes... I've seen this kind of cheese tried. Even people calling "flat" from their own sword hitting their legs and such, which is why we always played it as any part of the weapon hit into you, and even if it is light, to keep the "indestructibles" out of the game. I would like to hear thoughts about this.

[Derian]

Wow, three posts from you that I agree with in one night, Satanaka. Something must be wrong.

[Satanaka]

Darn! I got to get the mask back ajusted or get back on the meds... :devil:


hehehehehe... Thanks Derian.

Wow, three posts from you that I agree with in one night, Satanaka. Something must be wrong.

[Satanaka]

If I am the one hitting someone in the head- sometimes, and sometimes I still do Pushups.

Why, it's clearly stated in the Book of War that a foot on ground counts as ground.

Do you also take accidental headshots as death? It's the same deal.

[Derian]

Well, still though, I mean, if we were fighting, and I were to clearly accidentally hit you in the head - would you take death? It's the same thing in my mind. This isn't an issue of rules ambiguity; the rules clearly spell out that foot on ground is ground.

[Satanaka]

If you hit me? me take death? only if it knocked the living dog snot out of me- else- It's on YOUR Honor to take death.
Some things are a point of Honor- NOT in the rules. If I clocked someone in the head- I might either take death or do pushups.
Maybe it's an old school thing.

Well, still though, I mean, if we were fighting, and I were to clearly accidentally hit you in the head - would you take death? It's the same thing in my mind. This isn't an issue of rules ambiguity; the rules clearly spell out that foot on ground is ground.