 | | Re: SCAdians (was: some train thing) —James Brown
|
| | | (...) I think plague counts as one of the "bad parts", so we ignore that. And I'd never switch to all things Renaissance... you'll never catch me waving around one of those silly pokey swords, and wearing fruffly clothing. <grin, duck> James (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: SCAdians (was: some train thing) —John D. Forinash
|
| | | | | (...) Only if you don't target the people making things political. :) (...) But in the Renaissance, armor and weapons got so much more elegant. Of course, this was largely because the cannon of the king and the arquebus of the common foot soldier (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: SCAdians (was: some train thing) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) I see people like that at all the time in the SCA; I think the preferred term is "fop" or "dandy." 8^) (...) I have several suits of chain, and SCA people ask if I fight in it. I say, why would I? It offers no impact protection, coupled with (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: SCAdians (was: some train thing) —James Brown
|
| | | | | | (...) Around here, we call them "swishy-poke". They call us a variety of more stylish insults, but we heavy fighters are simple folk, with simple insults. ;) (...) That's why I fight in a moving blanket (technical term: gambeson). It's a little (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: SCAdians (was: some train thing) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | (...) Thinking of various sorts of weapons and dress reminded me of the group which performed at the SF con we had back in October. They are a group who do staged combats using close to real weapons (I don't think they're sharp). They were quite (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
