Tourneys and jousting

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by The Colonel

Are we looking at the sort of period where jousting was established enough for contestants to wear specialised jousting armour or are they still using field armour?

Specialised jousting armour exists, but that doesn't mean that everyone can afford it.

[Exeter]

Two points I'd like to interject:

1. While on horseback, I'd probably consider both combatants to have bad footing (which could, of course, be negated by Perfect Balance).

2. Don't forget that breaking your lance can be considered a loss just as falling off your horse is. Thus, someone with Fine or Very Fine quality weapons will be at a significant advantage.

[aesir23]

Sorry, you're just wrong on both counts.

Originally Posted by Exeter

Two points I'd like to interject:

1. While on horseback, I'd probably consider both combatants to have bad footing (which could, of course, be negated by Perfect Balance).

GURPS already has rules for mounted combat, and they have nothing to do with bad footing.

Originally Posted by Exeter

2. Don't forget that breaking your lance can be considered a loss just as falling off your horse is. Thus, someone with Fine or Very Fine quality weapons will be at a significant advantage.

Breaking your lance on your opponents shield was a good thing, it was how you scored points.

[Exeter]

Originally Posted by aesir23

Sorry, you're just wrong on both counts.

Ouch, 0 for 2. :P

I actually didn't realize that breaking your own lance on an opponent's shield scored you points.

However, for the bad footing point, I realize there are mounted combat rules in GURPS, but (at least the ones in Campaigns -- maybe there are other rules in Martial Arts that I don't have access to) they don't really deal well with the specific situation where *all* the opponent is trying to do is unhorse you. To model that specific situation, I think it's perfectly reasonable to consider both combatants as having bad footing (which would give some negatives to the Riding roll needed to remain on the horse, and allow Perfect Balance to have an effect).

The reason I suggest this is that in tournament jousting, you're really not trying to hurt the other guy at all. All you're trying to do is connect your lance with the other guy's shield solidly enough that the torque created knocks him off his mount. It might not literally be a case of bad footing, but the rules for bad footing seem to create the right effect.

[trooper6]

Originally Posted by Exeter

Ouch, 0 for 2. :P

The reason I suggest this is that in tournament jousting, you're really not trying to hurt the other guy at all. All you're trying to do is connect your lance with the other guy's shield solidly enough that the torque created knocks him off his mount. It might not literally be a case of bad footing, but the rules for bad footing seem to create the right effect.

Wouldn't the knockback rules be easier? If you get knocked back, you are off your horse.

If you fail to block, you get hit. Opponent does enough damage...you are knocked back.

If you succeed in blocking, but only by DB, then the damage goes to your shield...which will lead to knockback with enough damage.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by trooper6

Wouldn't the knockback rules be easier? If you get knocked back, you are off your horse.

If you fail to block, you get hit. Opponent does enough damage...you are knocked back.

If you succeed in blocking, but only by DB, then the damage goes to your shield...which will lead to knockback with enough damage.

While mostly true, actually the mounted combat rules assume that knockback doesn't lead to automatic unhorsing. You get a Riding check, at -4 per yard of knockback.

What concerns me is that from what I can gather in the riding rules, a +3 bonus against being unhorsed is a feature of war saddles. This means that it's really hard to unhorse even a knight of minimal skill (who presumably still has to meet a minimum of skill 12) and almost impossible to unhorse an expert without inflicting terrible damage (in order to knock a ST 14 man two yards back, it's necessary to do 24 points of damage). And tournament lances aren't supposed to do that much damage and break before it happens.

I hope that the revised Low-Tech will make it clear that any bonuses from riding gear only serve to remove penalties and never grant a net bonus. That alleviates the problem somewhat.

[Exeter]

Originally Posted by Icelander

What concerns me is that from what I can gather in the riding rules, a +3 bonus against being unhorsed is a feature of war saddles. This means that it's really hard to unhorse even a knight of minimal skill (who presumably still has to meet a minimum of skill 12) and almost impossible to unhorse an expert without inflicting terrible damage (in order to knock a ST 14 man two yards back, it's necessary to do 24 points of damage). And tournament lances aren't supposed to do that much damage and break before it happens.

Is it the case then that saddles used for jousting rather than war are built differently, the latter giving the bonus and the former not? That would make the task of unhorsing a moderately skilled knight in a tournament setting much easier. But, you're right, using the knockback rules combined with the fact that tournament lances can only deal 15 points of damage before breaking means that a ST 10 knight with a half-decent Riding skill isn't going to get unhorsed too often.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Exeter

Is it the case then that saddles used for jousting rather than war are built differently, the latter giving the bonus and the former not? That would make the task of unhorsing a moderately skilled knight in a tournament setting much easier. But, you're right, using the knockback rules combined with the fact that tournament lances can only deal 15 points of damage before breaking means that a ST 10 knight with a half-decent Riding skill isn't going to get unhorsed too often.

ST 10 isn't all too likely, though. Being a knight (rather than just having an equivalent status) in the setting is both a potentially lethal job and a professional sport career. Physical health and strength are usually prerequisites for knighthood and while a heroic and/or well-bred and connected person without the physical attributes might be knighted, he or she would likely be hurt too often in tourneys to continue to compete.

A ST 11 knight would be considered slight. ST 12 is about the average.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Exeter

Is it the case then that saddles used for jousting rather than war are built differently, the latter giving the bonus and the former not?

Jousting saddles are constructed expressively to make it easy to stay in the saddle while hitting something with a lance at full tilt. If anything gets a bonus, those do.

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Jousting saddles are constructed expressively to make it easy to stay in the saddle while hitting something with a lance at full tilt. If anything gets a bonus, those do.

And don't forget the Stay Seated technique from martial arts.