Fighting Stances in WoR [SPOILERS]

[Awesomeness Summoned he/him]

I haven't done any graphic design work for the forum in a while so decided to finish up tracing the glyphs on the fighting guide art page. I'm not sure what to name each of them and don't want to just name them "fighting guide 1", "fighting guide 2", etc. Thought this might be the best group to get ideas from.

 

as a reminder, here is the page I'm working from:

Based on the predominant votes I'm assuming this is a guide for windstance, yes? So, based on the page, I would guess the glyph in the first picture stands for "windstance", the second glyph for "parry" or "block" and the third picture is a "riposte". The fourth large glyph in the bottom picture could mean "victory" or "success" if those are all performed correctly maybe? I'm not sure what the second large glyph on the top right would stand for if the first large one is windstance itself. Perhaps it says windstance guide or some such?

 

My thoughts:

 

  =  windstance

 

  =  Guide/Manual

 

  =  Parry/Block

 

  =  Riposte

 

  =  Victory/Success

 

Any alternative ideas for what these could mean?

 

On another note, any ideas what the red stamp could be at the bottom right?

 

 

Is that something the person who "recovered" the page stamped on it? Maybe just a stamp by say the vorin church or some such organization approving the guide? It looks a little like the Dustbringer glyph but definitely different.

[snote]

The one thing that bugs me about the stances is a small discrepancy between WoK and WoR with Wind Stance. During Dalinar's fight with the Parshendi Shardbearer (Eshonai) it says something along the lines of, "Dalinar was forced to parry. Something Wind Stance wasn't designed to do..." then during a scene where Adolin is dueling in the arena, it says something like, "He used the swooping strikes of Wind Stance to parry." I know it doesn't directly contradict, because he doesn't say he's parrying with Wind Stance. I just don't think using strikes as a parry technique makes sense, if the form wasn't meant for it. I mean what is a parry if not a defensive strike or blade placement? One implies force and arch being greater is all. The reason it bothers me mainly is a stance controls your footing and center of balance. If you're doing something during your maneuver that your body isn't set up for. You're likely to lose something you want to keep. If he were to parry using close together footing, while double fisting his Shardblade, swinging it forward from two blocks behind him, and putting everything he has into the block. It is going to leave him in a horribly off balance state. So, when Dalinar says, "It wasn't designed to do this." I take his word for it. If anyone knows what is possible to do inside a shard based fight, it's the Blackthorn. Anyone else notice this situation or am I just being overly nitpicky? I'm also not above admitting I'm just not thinking about things in the right way.

[name_here]

I think what Dalinar means by "wasn't intended to do" is "isn't very good at", as opposed to totally incapable of doing so. Other stances are better for parrying, but as Dalinar demonstrated by successfully parrying Eshonai, it's still possible to parry in Windstance.

 

During the duel, the exact phrase is "Adolin calmly stepped back and used the proper Windstance sweeps for parrying a thrust." So clearly parries exist in Windstance, but they're referred to as sweeps and Adolin stepped back to use them. Presumably, they're awkward enough that he needed to give ground to parry and return to stance before his opponent could make another strike. Ironstance, say, probably has a form for parrying a thrust while maintaining position, which is important on a battlefield because eventually you run out of ground to give. It's not a good idea fighting on the edge of a plateau, for instance. As for why Adolin was parrying in Windstance, he was showing off. He was proving he was enough better than his opponent that he could use bad tactics and still inflict the maximum possible damage to his opponent's Shardplate allowed by the duel rules without taking a single hit. Normally, in Windstance he'd probably block the thrust with his bracer and make his own attack, sidestepped, or struck first.

[Ailessar]

Although the signing last night was great, I got to meet other fans, and got my two books and Bridge Four patch signed,  I was disappointed, though, that Brandon told me that I would have to email Ben McSweeney with my printout because he said the artist made the final determinations as to what the stances looked like based on Brandon’s descriptions.  Brandon said that he could get them wrong too easily. 

 

Anyways I’ll email Ben.  Sorry guys but it looks like we’ll have to keep speculating.  So this really all comes down to the context in the books rather than real-world skills, as Inkthinker said.  It might be a long time before I get any feedback, if at all.  

 

@AwesomenessSummoned, those are  -- well, awesome! Upvote! I think your proposed names sound cool.  Although the first one might be a toss between Windstance and Ironstance.  For the last one, instead of “Victory/Success”, I thought that “For the Kill” or just “Kill” sounded apt.  What term do fencers use when they score a hit?

 

PS.  This is an odd coincidence, but when I go to Ben's website, it's called Inkthiner.net. 

Edited March 22, 2014 by Ailessar

[Awesomeness Summoned he/him]

PS. This is an odd coincidence, but when I go to Ben's website, it's called Inkthiner.net.

Lol. Yeah, I was just about to inform you before I saw your PS that inkthinker is Ben McSweeney so you might just want to ask him which ones were which.

Edit: on that note, inkthinker, can you provide any feedback on my guesses at the glyph meanings on that page? I'd also really love to know what the red stamp means

Edited March 23, 2014 by Awesomeness Summoned

[Ailessar]

So Inkthinker is Ben??  Wow, I had no idea! lol

 

I did email Ben on his website.  And I'll PM Inkthinker here.  Hopefully all my begging will wear him down. :-)

[snote]

I think what Dalinar means by "wasn't intended to do" is "isn't very good at", as opposed to totally incapable of doing so. Other stances are better for parrying, but as Dalinar demonstrated by successfully parrying Eshonai, it's still possible to parry in Windstance.

 

During the duel, the exact phrase is "Adolin calmly stepped back and used the proper Windstance sweeps for parrying a thrust." So clearly parries exist in Windstance, but they're referred to as sweeps and Adolin stepped back to use them. Presumably, they're awkward enough that he needed to give ground to parry and return to stance before his opponent could make another strike. Ironstance, say, probably has a form for parrying a thrust while maintaining position, which is important on a battlefield because eventually you run out of ground to give. It's not a good idea fighting on the edge of a plateau, for instance. As for why Adolin was parrying in Windstance, he was showing off. He was proving he was enough better than his opponent that he could use bad tactics and still inflict the maximum possible damage to his opponent's Shardplate allowed by the duel rules without taking a single hit. Normally, in Windstance he'd probably block the thrust with his bracer and make his own attack, sidestepped, or struck first.

Thank you for the reply. I upvoted the response, because, well, it deserved it. Anyways, I get exactly what you're saying. I think in the vision Dalinar has where he fights the Midnite Essence beasts he uses Smoke Stance to prevent ground being given. I'd imagine you're right about Iron Stance as well.

Sometimes my speculations will go down a rabbit hole where I don't know which way is up and there are talking mice and cats that disappear. So, it really helps ground my run away thoughts to get a well stated and logical response to my inquiries.

[Ailessar]

Welcome to the forum, snote! It's fun to speculate, and this is the right forum to do it!  I'm not a swordsman, so I can't explain the "logic" of the fighting as described in the book  (which is why I wanted to visualize these stances).  Also, if you find a discrepancy, you can go to the Typos thread pinned above and ask Peter.  There might well be more that have escaped editing, in a book this large.  But I'm glad name_here was able to explain the discrepancy you mentioned.

 

Hope you have fun joining in the craziness or forming your own theories! :-) 

[name_here]

Thank you for the reply. I upvoted the response, because, well, it deserved it. Anyways, I get exactly what you're saying. I think in the vision Dalinar has where he fights the Midnite Essence beasts he uses Smoke Stance to prevent ground being given. I'd imagine you're right about Iron Stance as well.

 

Yeah, a sword-and-dagger stance tends to be really good for parrying with the off-hand weapon. Plus, in the vision he wasn't wearing his Shardplate. One of the advantages of armor is that it means you don't necessarily have to parry every attack, but that's rarely an option without armor. That's probably why the two best Shardbearers favor Windstance, because they can ignore parrying and let their armor take the hits. Of course, it's better to not get hit even in Shardplate because the damage does add up and it slows down as stormlight leaks away, but there's also the overall tactical situation to consider. If they focus on parrying too much it leaves the enemy free to attack their allies and then isolate and swarm the Shardbearer.

 

When Adolin opts to finish his duel as quickly and efficiently as possible, he goes with Ironstance, which apparently strikes a balance between defensive effectiveness and rapid, powerful strikes against a single target instead of a large group.

Edited March 23, 2014 by name_here

[Inkthinker]

Every illustration in a Stormlight book represents a real-world document. And the funny thing about documents, especially documents in a society that's semi-literate, is that they're not always accurate to the finest detail. Sometimes people mess things up or make mistakes, and we take advantage of that in the pieces we do for the book.

Isaac's page is based on similar documents published by fighting schools in Europe a few hundred years ago, sometimes called "fechtbuchs" (fight books). They're often a little interpretive, meant to serve as a study aid rather than as an honest representation of movement. Shallan's pages are (unfortunately for me) seen as more accurate because of the nature of her powers, but she's not infallible and she's not always drawing a "Memory", sometimes she's just working in the ways of a natural illustrator. Lastly, she draws as an observer of a subject rather than an expert IN the subject, so sometimes she misses out on a detail because she doesn't recognize it's importance.

I know a lot of that boils down to basically weaseling loopholes. Part of playing with Brandon's toys is that I have to be careful about what I say regarding behind-the-scenes bits. I expect to speak with Brandon fairly soon, and I'll see what he wants me to say about the stances then. In the meantime, you guys are doing pretty good with the deductive reasoning so far.

[snote]

Every illustration in a Stormlight book represents a real-world document. And the funny thing about documents, especially documents in a society that's semi-literate, is that they're not always accurate to the finest detail. Sometimes people mess things up or make mistakes, and we take advantage of that in the pieces we do for the book.

Isaac's page is based on similar documents published by fighting schools in Europe a few hundred years ago, sometimes called "fechtbuchs" (fight books). They're often a little interpretive, meant to serve as a study aid rather than as an honest representation of movement. Shallan's pages are (unfortunately for me) seen as more accurate because of the nature of her powers, but she's not infallible and she's not always drawing a "Memory", sometimes she's just working in the ways of a natural illustrator. Lastly, she draws as an observer of a subject rather than an expert IN the subject, so sometimes she misses out on a detail because she doesn't recognize it's importance.

I know a lot of that boils down to basically weaseling loopholes. Part of playing with Brandon's toys is that I have to be careful about what I say regarding behind-the-scenes bits. I expect to speak with Brandon fairly soon, and I'll see what he wants me to say about the stances then. In the meantime, you guys are doing pretty good with the deductive reasoning so far.

I'm sure I speak for everyone in the thread when I say, thank you for your response! Your artwork is very interesting and beautiful. It suits the subject matter in a very appealing way. I'll stop gushing now.

I'd say since the people doing the writing and drawing aren't the same people using the stances, arms, and armor. That it prevents a level of understanding being translated, that would otherwise be present. A level of understanding that, if say, the person describing the "thing" were also personally and intimately familiar with the "thing".

[Ailessar]

Every illustration in a Stormlight book represents a real-world document. And the funny thing about documents, especially documents in a society that's semi-literate, is that they're not always accurate to the finest detail. Sometimes people mess things up or make mistakes, and we take advantage of that in the pieces we do for the book.

Isaac's page is based on similar documents published by fighting schools in Europe a few hundred years ago, sometimes called "fechtbuchs" (fight books). They're often a little interpretive, meant to serve as a study aid rather than as an honest representation of movement. Shallan's pages are (unfortunately for me) seen as more accurate because of the nature of her powers, but she's not infallible and she's not always drawing a "Memory", sometimes she's just working in the ways of a natural illustrator. Lastly, she draws as an observer of a subject rather than an expert IN the subject, so sometimes she misses out on a detail because she doesn't recognize it's importance.

I know a lot of that boils down to basically weaseling loopholes. Part of playing with Brandon's toys is that I have to be careful about what I say regarding behind-the-scenes bits. I expect to speak with Brandon fairly soon, and I'll see what he wants me to say about the stances then. In the meantime, you guys are doing pretty good with the deductive reasoning so far.

 

Thanks so much, Inkthinker! I'll add my gushing to snote's and just say how awesome an artist you are.  Your work has hugely sparked many an imagination here.  (And I love that you added a glimpse of Adolin in the sketch.  I would give you a hundred upvotes just for that.)

 

So basically, I'm getting that the sketch is very much from a layperson's viewpoint.  A lot like mine, as from someone who admires the sport of swordfighting because it can be beautiful as well as thrilling to watch.  

 

Thanks again!! 

[beagel]

Hi,

i only read the first few posts here, but i think i have to add the following: The stances in the books are whole sets of moves and techniques. That's simple common sense, standing in one way and doing one move isn't what is shown in the books, every stance has several moves at least. That's the case with real fighting schools too. The positions you identify as stances are mostly positions from Lichtenauers "Fechten mit dem langen Schwert" used by transitioning through the positions. You assume a position, do a move and end up in anothe position to do another move. See this Video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kj4Ng6DBfrg

 

One example from the video @ around 1:05: Starting with #10 (Alber, a defensive position, but more upright than the picture) the defender deflects the attack and starts his follow-up attack from #9 (Ox oder Ochs, an offensive stab, but also more upright than the picture):

 

My point is: these are positions and moves that are used together, basically one position to do a move (defensive or offensice) to land in a new position to start another move. But in the books it's made clear that the stances are whole fighting schools. So while there may be more than one stance on Shallans sheet, one position doesn't make a stance from the books and the shown positions can be from any number of stances.

But i think Sandersons not-being-up-to-snuff as pertains fighting shows here. Like in Mistborn, the duell Kelsier "helps" seems to be written with olympic fencing in mind (that's a sport, not a martial art). Here Sanderson seems to draw inspiration from real life fighting styles, but interpret the positions as whole fighting styles by themselves. In that case: Yes all the stances may well be on Shallans sheet :-)

 

And please understand: i love the books, it's just that sometimes i think: "That's not real." But even then: the action scenes in the books are wonderful and exciting. Wouldn't read Fantasy if i didn't want unrealism :-)

Edited March 24, 2014 by beagel

[name_here]

I've been assuming that the drawing is the default guard position for each stance. Combatants would transition into other positions while actually fighting, but the stances depicted are how people stood when Shallan said, "Get into Windstance for a sketch". So each stance would correspond to the sketch that resembles the description given when entering the stance and is suited for what the stance is best at.

 

Incidentally, #9 doesn't really look like a thrusting stance to me. I mean, the sword is pointed forwards, but it looks pretty awkward to get much forward movement from the arms and the feet don't seem well-positioned for a lunge. Then again, I can't imagine any other possible reason to be in that position. Could be that I'm misjudging the arm position.

[Swimmingly he/him]

I thought it was more a method of fighting built around a certain set of moves; while you can remain in stance for an entire fight, and often will for repetitive battles where the enemy has a lot of numbers you're killing with each strike, a duel with another Shardbearer has you switching and changing stances to throw off their strategy.

[snote]

I always assumed that the "stances" were a starting position for a move set. Maybe even a rhythm to your attacks. From what all I've seen each stance has an overarching idea behind it. Flame stance (or was it fire?) is made up of short quick attacks. Wind Stance is sweeping and broad. Iron Stance is more powerful and defensive. I imagine them as a foot position that allows for more control over the stances idea. So, like Wind Stance is designed to keep your balance as you reach out your arms more, etc. Also, yeah, I think for dueling in shards it makes move, counter-move combat more a chess match. Also, with the shard blades being a unique item that forces you to exert more control over your weapon, rather than power. It isn't like if you were using a sword or other weapon that is impeded by everything it touches. So, I think the wide arching Wind Stance maneuvers are great for mowing down the maximum number of enemies on a battlefield. Yet not hardly worthwhile when used against an enemy shardbearer. You'd want something that can recover and press the attack more efficiently.

[beagel]

My post was only for information, i thought the people here have basic misconceptions about real life fighting. What happens in the Cosmere is Brandons thing, reality hasn't much say there :-).

Like i said, in the source of inspiration for most of the shown positions, they are used together. Limiting a style (e.g. no wide swings) and needing to reset when using other characteristics (using wide swings), is crazy. Of course there are differences, for example in dagger fighting: in german style the blade extents from the "thumb side" of the hand, in italian from the other side. The styles have differences, but not that much, because moves dictated by weapon and body don't change that much. Another example: japanese sword fighting and german swordfighting differ because japanes swords are made for slashing with one edge while in europe there are double edged blades with guards. double edge and guard change much, but even then moves and positions are often the same. Or english and german fighting: the technique chains in england were made more to give the defender a strong position, while in german fencing the chains lead to a strong attacking position. Totally different styles but positions and moves are mostly the same. Differences in fighting styles come from the different weapons, and different goals or at least stopovers.

Wide sweeping blows are not a good idea with erverything shorter than a spear (and polearms have the problem that you should hit with the head, making sweeping blows ok, but not good). With a "Bidenhänder" or a claymore on the other hand, you can almost only fight with wide sweeping blows.

Limiting a style and/or using moves and positions that aren't made for the weapon are just unrealistic...

But thats how it goes in reality, like i said i suspect that that's something coming from Sanderson describing fights very indepth, but not in a realistic way. Which is ok, as he makes the scenes exciting and cool, regardless.

[PorridgeBrick he/him]

I'll just revive this thread here before it dies down fully. Has there been any new info on this? Inkthinker, do you know now if you can confirm any of the Stances here? The speculation seems to be gone by now, so there's no reason to wait on that.

[TheArcanist he/him]

Well, I've been doing a lot of experimenting with actual swords- feeling my way around different stances, re-reading the fight scenes and especially Adolin's duels -and I've come to the conclusion that Ironstance is almost certainly Fig. 4 for a number of reasons.

 

1. The context of the sketch would seem to indicate that the Shardbearer in that stance is Adolin, as the helm is effectively the same as the face which is almost certainly his. [Note the "Sigh" written and double underlined beneath the quick portrait]

 

2. We know Shallan was present at almost all of his duels, if not all of them, and she would've had ample opportunity to take a Memory of a particular fight and draw it later.

 

3. During one of Adolin's fights, he briefly mentions using Ironstance to strike like he's chopping wood. Normally, it seems that this has been interpreted as meaning it was like he was cutting a cord of wood by splitting logs- chopping downwards. However, what if he was referring to actually cutting down a tree? This seems a likely interpretation given the flow of the fight [For the life of me, I can't remember the exact page or passage], and if that's correct, then Fig. 4 is the only stance in which this would've been easy to do.

[PorridgeBrick he/him]

1&2. This supports it being Windstance more, however. Shallan wasn't there during the Ironstance fight, and Adolin's preferred stance is Windstance. He only used Ironstance to make a quick and brutal win, and there's no indication he fought that way in any of his other fights.

3.

"Adolin twisted and fell into Ironstance, with his sword held two-handed up beside his head. He slapped away Salinor’s first strike, then stepped in and slammed his Blade down into the man’s helm. Once, twice, three times" - WoR 224

Sounds like he's chopping down a la splitting logs to me.

[TheArcanist he/him]

True. Hmm... I could've sworn there was a different mention of him using Ironstance to make a "wood-splitting". I'm going to have to read through everything else again.

 

So I suppose it's effectively confirmed that Fig. 4 is Windstance?

[PorridgeBrick he/him]

Unfortunately, not until we get someone to confirm it. The book seems to point to that, certainly, but from Inkthinker's comments there might be some significant fudging going on here so we can't know for sure.