Describe the German longsword style practiced by ARMA

[Michael Navas]

I recently heard ARMA's style with the longsword described as a "feint and devastate" -kind of style. From my admittedly limted understanding of it from manuals, videos and technique descriptions, that seems far off. I would describe it more as a "Counterstrike and follow-up as necessary" -kind of style.

But I might be way off myself. How would you people with first-hand experience in the field describe the style in just a few words?

[ChristineChurches]

Hmmm....

"Historically accurate" and "martially sound" come to mind, but you seem to be looking for something else.

[David Kite]

I recently heard ARMA's style with the longsword described as a "feint and devastate" -kind of style. From my admittedly limted understanding of it from manuals, videos and technique descriptions, that seems far off. I would describe it more as a "Counterstrike and follow-up as necessary" -kind of style.

But I might be way off myself. How would you people with first-hand experience in the field describe the style in just a few words?

in short? "Hit him"

That someone would describe our "style" as "feint and devastate" I find quite bizarre. Would you mind relating where you heard that from?

David Kite
GFS, ARMA in IN

[Stacy Clifford]

The masters generally all agreed that it's best to kill with as little wasted motion as possible, so making the right blow once is better than making a false blow first and then a true blow. It's all about efficiency, sizing up your opponent, assessing the best course of action, and then devastating them. Some opponents you can tell will clearly fall for a good feint, some you can tell will clearly make you pay for it, and some you just can't be sure. You want to have as many techniques in your arsenal as possible, pick the best one for what's facing you, and execute with confidence, no matter whether you're attacking or defending. If I had to reduce it to a phrase it would be more like "read, react, devastate." (I do think the masters would all agree with the devastate part, you don't want them getting up after all.)

[Michael Navas]

That someone would describe our "style" as "feint and devastate" I find quite bizarre. Would you mind relating where you heard that from?

To be fair, he didn't say "feint and devastate" word for word, but his description of the style amounts to that.

White Wolf Online. It's an RPG forum.

Normally that means I like to shoot down posters who make claims that run contrary to my knowledge, but this one claimed to have studied with ARMA members, and have further hinted at practicing regularly. So I figured I might as well ask the source.

Though, he also asserted that only European sword styles incorporated unarmed combat, which clearly is false. But otherwise, he has shown to be better informed than me, so I'm not sure whether to call BS or not.

[Michael Navas]

The masters generally all agreed that it's best to kill with as little wasted motion as possible, so making the right blow once is better than making a false blow first and then a true blow. It's all about efficiency, sizing up your opponent, assessing the best course of action, and then devastating them. Some opponents you can tell will clearly fall for a good feint, some you can tell will clearly make you pay for it, and some you just can't be sure. You want to have as many techniques in your arsenal as possible, pick the best one for what's facing you, and execute with confidence, no matter whether you're attacking or defending. If I had to reduce it to a phrase it would be more like "read, react, devastate." (I do think the masters would all agree with the devastate part, you don't want them getting up after all.)

Still, couldn't this be said of just about any practical martial arts style, armed or unarmed? It has to be possible to summarize what usually happens in practice when using this style, surely.

If I generalize enough, I can call Boxing a "powerful punches at the head" -style, while calling Tae Know Do a "quick kicks to the legs and stomach" -style, even if both incorporate much, much more than that.

Surely German longsword can be characterized somehow, compared to other styles practiced today.

[Ben Michels]

Still, couldn't this be said of just about any practical martial arts style, armed or unarmed? It has to be possible to summarize what usually happens in practice when using this style, surely.

If I generalize enough, I can call Boxing a "powerful punches at the head" -style, while calling Tae Know Do a "quick kicks to the legs and stomach" -style, even if both incorporate much, much more than that.

Surely German longsword can be characterized somehow, compared to other styles practiced today.

"sharp metal object to the face"-style?

You're trying to compare something that includes many 'separate' skill sets and differences between individuals to martial arts that concentrate on just one or a couple things (boxing is pretty much just punches). I'm not sure anyone will be able to give you an answer that fits a 'it's this style' format. I might spar very differently than someone I train with regularly. Other than what was suggested above by Stacy, it will be difficult to give you a phrase that clearly makes a distinction.

Edit:
I'm assuming DarthMRN is you, if not then I apologize. =)
Taken from http://forums.white-wolf.com/viewtopic. ... c&start=15
In response to someone saying that ARMA doesn't have one 'style'.

Really? Not in the sense that each member has his own style by grace of training only with his own group, but in the sense that they practice different styles from different parts of Europe? This surprises me even more to hear.

Cause near as I know, the only surviving manuals on longsword combat even remotely comprehensive enough to devise a style from are the German ones, possibly with some French influences. Seeing as how they are still working to recreate one style from evidence from various sources, I find it hard to believe they are actually praticing different styles from different cultures.

Do you happen to know which cultures these other styles come from, or the name of the masters who left them?

You're correct that German is a a rather large portion of our material, but contrary to what I saw someone claim (not sure if it was you) on the other forum, not all Italian manuals are rapier.

http://www.thearma.org/Manuals/Liberi.htm

I figured posting that quote would allow what your asking to become clearer for other ARMA members.

[Jim Churches]

"What is the spirit of the bayonet?!"


"TO KILL, TO KILL, TO KILL WITHOUT MERCY!!!"


"What makes the grass grow?!"


"BLOOD BLOOD BLOOD!!!!"

[Michael Navas]

You're trying to compare something that includes many 'separate' skill sets and differences between individuals to martial arts that concentrate on just one or a couple things (boxing is pretty much just punches). I'm not sure anyone will be able to give you an answer that fits a 'it's this style' format. I might spar very differently than someone I train with regularly. Other than what was suggested above by Stacy, it will be difficult to give you a phrase that clearly makes a distinction.

That surprises me to hear. Is ARMA longsword so practical and diverse that no generalizations can be made? But that is perhaps likely given how each group studies on their own.

I'm assuming DarthMRN is you, if not then I apologize. =)

Yep, that's me. Are you a WW'er?

You're correct that German is a a rather large portion of our material, but contrary to what I saw someone claim (not sure if it was you) on the other forum, not all Italian manuals are rapier.

http://www.thearma.org/Manuals/Liberi.htm

Ah, so Fiore was italian. I stand corrected.

[Stacy Clifford]

Yes, longsword really is that diverse. The manuals give you a very large variety of techniques and responses to situations, and most people tend to be more comfortable with or naturally inclined to certain sets of those techniques than others. Agile fighters will take more advantage of quick in and out attacks, sturdier (or just more aggressive) guys might be more inclined to close the distance and half-sword or grapple, some like to feint and false a lot and some will club you silly. We have guys that go for the head mostly, some really good at body shots and others that turn your shins purple with their favorite attacks. That's what makes sparring in ARMA so much fun, the broad range of techniques in the manuals matches the broad range of fighters using them, and you never know what type of fighter you'll be facing next. I'm fairly small and quick and will usually stay in cutting range to nail you with speed, but the knowledge is there for me to change my tactics and start closing if I think you're vulnerable to it. Any fighter will have certain things they favor, but the German and Italian sources we study allow us to individualize our styles that way without going outside the system. In my view, it maximizes unpredictability, unlike styles more easily characterized as you describe, which is what makes it so effective. Those guys weren't worried about style points, just staying alive by any means possible. Make sense?

[Ben Michels]

I'm assuming DarthMRN is you, if not then I apologize. =)

Yep, that's me. Are you a WW'er?

[

No, but I play Eve Online so I'm familiar with them.

Stacy seems to have explained it much better than I would have.

[Jaron Bernstein]

I recently heard ARMA's style with the longsword described as a "feint and devastate" -kind of style. From my admittedly limted understanding of it from manuals, videos and technique descriptions, that seems far off. I would describe it more as a "Counterstrike and follow-up as necessary" -kind of style.

But I might be way off myself. How would you people with first-hand experience in the field describe the style in just a few words?

In a nutshell: 1. varies with the individual and the situation in terms of specific techniques or body style. 2. Has to actually work on a resisting opponent. 3. Is based on techniques from the manuals. 4. has athleticism and explosive movement as its base. You might also read John C.'s article on core assumptions.

[Randall Pleasant]

I recently heard ARMA's style with the longsword described as a "feint and devastate" -kind of style. From my admittedly limted understanding of it from manuals, videos and technique descriptions, that seems far off. I would describe it more as a "Counterstrike and follow-up as necessary" -kind of style.

But I might be way off myself. How would you people with first-hand experience in the field describe the style in just a few words?

The best way to describe ARMA's interpretations and applications of European Longsword is: realistic, martial sound, and historically accurate.

[John_Clements]

Don't listen to descriptions of it from those who don't train in it. Just look at it in use in our videos and our seminars.

I have never placed great emphasis on feinting in my personal instruction of my own sparing. It is a natural action that occurs, yes, but not as part of some Doctrine.

JC

[MartinGrover]

"The sharp part goes into the other man" style?

Doesn't apply with mortschlag strokes using the blunt parts, but not everything can be concise...

Martin