ZOMBIE FORUMS

It's a stinking, shambling corpse grotesquely parodying life.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:23 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 107 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 7:17 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 7:47 pm
Posts: 1168
Zherical wrote:
pillaroforder wrote:
So what if Sarine broke Sara's nose, she is a decent healer if she does say so herself.

You just want an excuse to see chicks fighting :D

Hey, what's a guy to do? Buffy is ancient history and the Medium and the Ghost Whisperer are such wimps!

_________________
"We are not going to die! And do you know why? Because Thomas is too pretty to die. And because I'm too stubborn to die. And most of all because tomorrow is Oktoberfest, Butters, and <i>polka will never die!</i>"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 7:32 am 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 3:59 am
Posts: 83
A sword is a tool, you use it to help you get a job done, not to do the job for you.

Anime is crap.. real battle axes weren't that heavy and they sometimes had 'fullers' to lighten them too.


pillaroforder wrote:
So what if Sarine broke Sara's nose, she is a decent healer if she does say so herself.


Opps sorry I broke your nose, here, let me heal it."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 8:04 am 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 345
Location: The Astral Plane
Mestro wrote:
Opps sorry I broke your nose, here, let me heal it."

Sara is a little kitten unable to do grown-up things, like heal herself?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 8:10 am 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 3:47 am
Posts: 270
Location: 3rd rock from the Sun
While unconcious or with manacles back in place, too?

_________________
Polly: I'm not going to die, am I? I mean right now?
DEATH: NO. BUT YOU WERE TOLD YOU WOULD WALK WITH DEATH EVERY DAY.
Polly: Oh...Yes, Corporal Scallot said that.
DEATH: HE IS AN OLD FRIEND. YOU MIGHT SAY HE IS ON THE INSTALMENT PLAN.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 8:54 am 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 9:44 am
Posts: 265
Location: The Zoo, US northern coast
Most of what I've read indicates that the axe is largely an offensive weapon and requires a lot of room to be effective, and leaves the user open a lot, both during the swing and during the recovery.


I think what we just saw, with Sarine grabbing the weapon and punching Sara, along with the way in which Jon took Sara down in the church, shows us one of the limitations that most of the chronomonkeys have: their training and thinking and learned reflexes are all about their weapons, and about direct attacks. Each time someone steps outside that, they seem to be taken by surprise. Sara lets someone grab her weapon twice, and is taken by surprise by the use of the body itself as a weapon. Warrell responds to Jon's bullet as a direct attack, and not as a distraction, leaving himself open to being sliced in half.

Jon is right, the Ensigerum are largely being trained by idiots.

_________________
"I prefer to be true to myself, even at the hazard of incurring the ridicule of others, rather than to be false, and to incur my own abhorrence." -- Frederick Douglass, 1817-1895


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 8:57 am 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 345
Location: The Astral Plane
pillaroforder wrote:
While unconcious or with manacles back in place, too?

Wait, why would Sara need to go get manacles before healing herself? And when did she fall into an eternal coma, unable to wake up to heal herself? I find that hard to believe, she doesn't even look like she would be knocked out by that hit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 9:51 am 
Offline
n00b
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 9:55 am
Posts: 14
I don't see how you can tell, when you're hitting to the head you can hit someone so hard that they die without any particular amount of force. Not that I'm suggesting she has mind but head injuries are very hard to predict.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 10:31 am 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 345
Location: The Astral Plane
I assume because Sarine is an experienced fighter and she has shown no indication of this being a fight where she would want to knock out her opponent. And the hit itself doesn't show anything conclusive towards it being enough to knock her out cold.

You could argue for the opposing view, but not in any way that would undermine my original statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 12:14 pm 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 3:47 am
Posts: 270
Location: 3rd rock from the Sun
Rakshasa wrote:
pillaroforder wrote:
While unconcious or with manacles back in place, too?

Wait, why would Sara need to go get manacles before healing herself? And when did she fall into an eternal coma, unable to wake up to heal herself? I find that hard to believe, she doesn't even look like she would be knocked out by that hit.


I simply meant if Sara was knocked unconcious and Sarine still didn't trust her, she would put the manacles back on and heal any damage herself, to show some good will. For story progression I root for Sara being only dazed.

EDIT: Sarine would put the manacles on and heal her. I should've learned my lesson in clarity by now.

_________________
Polly: I'm not going to die, am I? I mean right now?
DEATH: NO. BUT YOU WERE TOLD YOU WOULD WALK WITH DEATH EVERY DAY.
Polly: Oh...Yes, Corporal Scallot said that.
DEATH: HE IS AN OLD FRIEND. YOU MIGHT SAY HE IS ON THE INSTALMENT PLAN.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 12:48 pm 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 345
Location: The Astral Plane
Why would she put the manacles back on? Isn't that like going back to circle one... or was that square...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 1:05 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 7:47 pm
Posts: 1168
Killjoy wrote:
Most of what I've read indicates that the axe is largely an offensive weapon and requires a lot of room to be effective, and leaves the user open a lot, both during the swing and during the recovery.

Yup. This still makes it a good tool for large, burly barbarians who fight in open formations and don't otherwise give a shit, and also for guys who fight in heavy plate armor and need to cleave other guys who also fight in heavy plate armor. These people had two things in common with the barbarians: they were brought up on a protein-intensive diet (meat and fish) and were therefore larger than average for the time, and they were athletic and weapon-trained from childhood.

Per Tuchman, when Jean II ( Le' Bon, or "the Good-natured) of France lost to Edward of Woodstock ("the Black Prince,") at Poitiers, he fought on while surrounded by English men-at-arms for some time, keeping them at bay with sweeps from his two-handed axe. He only gave up when a Gascon knight he recognized convinced him he could honorably surrender to someone of similar rank.

Given that the English of the period were known as some of the toughest soldiers in Europe, and that anyone who took down a king would gain a ransom as relatively fabulous as being an heir to Microsoft, the event says something of the persuasive power of the axe as a weapon.

_________________
"We are not going to die! And do you know why? Because Thomas is too pretty to die. And because I'm too stubborn to die. And most of all because tomorrow is Oktoberfest, Butters, and <i>polka will never die!</i>"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 2:03 pm 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 345
Location: The Astral Plane
Boss Out of Town wrote:
Given that the English of the period were known as some of the toughest soldiers in Europe, and that anyone who took down a king would gain a ransom as relatively fabulous as being an heir to Microsoft, the event says something of the persuasive power of the axe as a weapon.

Err, are you saying the grunts would get the ransom? Doesn't seem likely, beyond some paltry extra reward. Not enough to throw one's life at anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 3:37 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:42 pm
Posts: 1012
Location: Indiana Spaceport
Rakshasa wrote:
Boss Out of Town wrote:
Given that the English of the period were known as some of the toughest soldiers in Europe, and that anyone who took down a king would gain a ransom as relatively fabulous as being an heir to Microsoft, the event says something of the persuasive power of the axe as a weapon.

Err, are you saying the grunts would get the ransom? Doesn't seem likely, beyond some paltry extra reward. Not enough to throw one's life at anyway.


S-s-say what?! Do you know how demoralizing taking down a king would be to an opposing army? As well if it was some grunt who got upclose and personal? That statement you made speaks volumes about how little you know about moral and leadership in medieval warfare.

Weapons I want to see someone fight with in here are dual light maces. Bludgeoning damage to the head FTW!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 3:53 pm 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 345
Location: The Astral Plane
Kaz*CheesyDoritoBomb* wrote:
S-s-say what?! Do you know how demoralizing taking down a king would be to an opposing army? As well if it was some grunt who got upclose and personal? That statement you made speaks volumes about how little you know about moral and leadership in medieval warfare.

Since you are so all-knowing about this, give me an example of a grunt that got a kings ransom. I'd even settle for a sizable portion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 4:14 pm 
Offline
n00b

Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 6:29 am
Posts: 24
Rakshasa wrote:
Since you are so all-knowing about this, give me an example of a grunt that got a kings ransom. I'd even settle for a sizable portion.


Showing valor in battle was just about the only way to advance socially. Anyone who captured a king would have been knighted at the very least.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 4:36 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:42 pm
Posts: 1012
Location: Indiana Spaceport
Rakshasa wrote:
Kaz*CheesyDoritoBomb* wrote:
S-s-say what?! Do you know how demoralizing taking down a king would be to an opposing army? As well if it was some grunt who got upclose and personal? That statement you made speaks volumes about how little you know about moral and leadership in medieval warfare.

Since you are so all-knowing about this, give me an example of a grunt that got a kings ransom. I'd even settle for a sizable portion.


Never said I was all knowing, you put that into my mouth. But Eccles is right. A grunt that would manage to kill a king would be granted pretty sudden acceleration through social ranks and would at the least be granted some amount of land, no matter how small. And back in the day that was a sign of your wealth, how much land you had.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 4:44 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 7:47 pm
Posts: 1168
Rakshasa wrote:
Boss Out of Town wrote:
Given that the English of the period were known as some of the toughest soldiers in Europe, and that anyone who took down a king would gain a ransom as relatively fabulous as being an heir to Microsoft, the event says something of the persuasive power of the axe as a weapon.

Err, are you saying the grunts would get the ransom? Doesn't seem likely, beyond some paltry extra reward. Not enough to throw one's life at anyway.

Yes, actually, in large part. Remember, however, that "grunts" didn't mean the same thing in that army as in a modern army. The armored types doing most of the fighting might have as high a rank as duke or earl, and as low a rank as serjent or man-at-arms. All of these men, up to and including kings and princes, expected to make money off any military victory, either in ransom or loot. Even the unarmored archers in an English army would expect to get at least a good share of ransom money if they took a prisoner.

Rights of ransom and loot were written into all their contract, literally, in most cases. More than likely, the greatest restriction on share would be <i>lesse majeste</i>, which is to say, no one was going to let a commoner get enough money from ransom and loot to make him a gentleman. However, a knight or lord could expect to get most of it, minus a share for whoever hired him, presumably the king or some important noble or captain.

Virtually all the prisoners taken at Poiters were eventually ransomed by someone. Because of the extreme diverence in wealth throughout medieval society, the ransom of a middling level knight could set a common farmer or villager up for life.

In the next century, during the Wars of the Roses in England, leaders sometimes gave orders to "Spare the commons and kill the Lords!" This practice shocked the nobility of Europe, who all considered themselves part of the same social circle and all protected by the rules of ransom, and also risked mutiny among the English soldiers. They forfeited the financial opportunity of a lifetime when the "no quarter" command was given.

King John of France's ransom was eventually set at an amount later calculated as two years the total net income of his entire realm. The custom of the time and the code of chivalry determined that he be kept in luxury befitting his station while a prisoner and that he would give his oath as a Christian knight not to attempt to escape or get involved in politics during his imprisonment. John stayed in Englished castles for fifteen years, initially, returning France on vacation once or twice. After his ransom was re-negotiated---payment of the originally amount was fiscally impossible--he came back to France. When his war-ravaged realm could not meet the re-negotiated payments, he voluntarily returned to England and lived out his days in luxury, hunting, jousting, and partying. This earned him the condemnation of many people at the time and many more since. His abscence from France crippled the government. In the 16th Century, Francis II got himself bagged by Charles Hapburg and weaseled out of his ransom and parole deal. Less chivalrous, but definitely more patriotic.

_________________
"We are not going to die! And do you know why? Because Thomas is too pretty to die. And because I'm too stubborn to die. And most of all because tomorrow is Oktoberfest, Butters, and <i>polka will never die!</i>"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 5:47 pm 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 345
Location: The Astral Plane
Boss Out of Town wrote:
Rights of ransom and loot were written into all their contract, literally, in most cases. More than likely, the greatest restriction on share would be <i>lesse majeste</i>, which is to say, no one was going to let a commoner get enough money from ransom and loot to make him a gentleman. However, a knight or lord could expect to get most of it, minus a share for whoever hired him, presumably the king or some important noble or captain.

Err... So what you're basically saying is that the grunts would get a paltry (relatively) reward, while the lords would keep most of it?

Yet again I failed to account for human nature, damnation.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 6:38 pm 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 8:13 pm
Posts: 122
Location: New Jersey, exit 100
Kaz*CheesyDoritoBomb* wrote:
Rakshasa wrote:
Boss Out of Town wrote:
Given that the English of the period were known as some of the toughest soldiers in Europe, and that anyone who took down a king would gain a ransom as relatively fabulous as being an heir to Microsoft, the event says something of the persuasive power of the axe as a weapon.

Err, are you saying the grunts would get the ransom? Doesn't seem likely, beyond some paltry extra reward. Not enough to throw one's life at anyway.


S-s-say what?! Do you know how demoralizing taking down a king would be to an opposing army? As well if it was some grunt who got upclose and personal? That statement you made speaks volumes about how little you know about moral and leadership in medieval warfare.

Weapons I want to see someone fight with in here are dual light maces. Bludgeoning damage to the head FTW!


didn't one of the Janissaries get serious props for killing one of europes kings on the field of battle? this was during the crusades. the dude took off someones head and took it to the sultan as an early new years present because he thought the guy could fight (he found out about the kings identity after he had killed him).

oh and sara has been getting the shit kicked out of her for years. she can take a hit and even a layman is harder to knock out than tv would have you think. a boxer isn't even looking for the impact to devastate his opponent, but the rotation that causes the brain to slop about inside the skull works nicely.

funny part i just noticed sarine has this whole line the humans are unrefined jerks and thinks that she is above the behavior most of the elves yet she spends a good deal of time talking down to people. i don't buy that her mannerisms are all jons doing especially as she is the one who wiped his memory.

_________________
"the ovarian uppercut"
-drunkeness


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 6:50 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 7:47 pm
Posts: 1168
Rakshasa wrote:
Boss Out of Town wrote:
Rights of ransom and loot were written into all their contract, literally, in most cases. More than likely, the greatest restriction on share would be <i>lesse majeste</i>, which is to say, no one was going to let a commoner get enough money from ransom and loot to make him a gentleman. However, a knight or lord could expect to get most of it, minus a share for whoever hired him, presumably the king or some important noble or captain.

Err... So what you're basically saying is that the grunts would get a paltry (relatively) reward, while the lords would keep most of it? . . .
Yet again I failed to account for human nature, damnation.

I was more or less agreeing with you. Barring further research, I can only say that it would be a matter of what you would consider "paltry." I don't see a landless Welsh archer getting knighted for bagging a duke in combat, but a duke would be worth a spectacular fortune to everyone in the chain of command. If the archer got enough gold to buy a good-sized farm and his captain got a knighthood and similar cash to buy rentable lands and business, both men would have been legends in their home counties and potentially the founders of their familiy's fortunes for generations to come. If the prince or the king got more cash and prestige out of the deal, overall, I don't think they would complain.

There were worse ways to make it in medieval Europe. The commoner De La Pole family became Dukes of Suffolk after hustling war loans for Edward III's first invasion of France in the 14th Century. The Woodville family scored big time in the 15th Century because Elizabeth Woodville refused to be one of Edward IV's hundreds of sexual conquests held on to her "virtue" until he married her. By doing this, among other things, she managed to re-start the Wars of the Roses after everyone hoped they were over.

_________________
"We are not going to die! And do you know why? Because Thomas is too pretty to die. And because I'm too stubborn to die. And most of all because tomorrow is Oktoberfest, Butters, and <i>polka will never die!</i>"


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 107 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group