but because of that the line doesn't have a strong identity of it's own beyond some light theming around good guy and bad guy faction armor and color use. It cut's both ways, y'know? Makes it easy for everyone to head-cannon their own characters in, but also isn't so singular that you want to know what the lore is.
You can definitely have a good debate over what approach is better. I think people that defend the 'who cares, these figures are just meant to do your own thing with' are drastically under-estimating the power of franchises that are able to sell you on characters you don't care about the design of, because you care about the character. I've never bought a Luke Skywalker or even a Cobra Commander figure because I thought the figure itself just looked too awesome not to own. There's absolutely power in getting people to care about your characters.
On the other hand, that can absolutely be stifling and, weirdly, I've definitely spoken to people that don't feel right buying a 'bad guy' figure to put with their 'good guys' or whatever. So you can create arbitrary barriers by having lore that anyone actually cares about following.
Checkout Dequitem on YouTube. Amazing unscripted armored combat videos using historical weapons and techniques. Half-swording was one of the most effective combat stances for sword combat.
I'm very familiar with Dequitem. He makes really fun videos. I do have some problems with the presentation. I don't think he adequately explains the difference between what he's doing and what real combat would look like, and tends to present his stuff as 'this is what it would look like because I'm not choreographing this.' But not using choreography and actually fighting with real weapons with the intent to kill each other are very, very different things. Again, I still really like his videos. I just think it presents maybe the wrong picture.
Worse, I actually think he gives pretty iffy historical commentary (sometimes!) based on his experience -- which is experience fighting people using 'safe' weapons and not actually trying to kill him that he has extrapolated into being the same thing as using war weapons and trying to kill each other, for some reason.
Anywhooo... the two things I actually wanted to point out were that you don't need metal gauntlets to half-sword (you don't even need gloves at all, although it's certainly advisable - and metal gauntlets are the same as leather gloves on the actual part that touches the sword anyway), and that it's really intended to overcome a weakness of swords specifically against plate armor. I definitely wouldn't call it one of the most effective stances (to be all 'well actually' - it's a technique not a stance). It's effective against plate armor because nothing else you can do with a sword really is. But in an unarmored duel with longswords, you'll get your face split in half if you try to half-sword, unless you're already in specific binds.
I had a few successes with half-sword, but it was a binding technique after binding out of certain guard positions like posta longa or posta di fenestra (I did Fiore, primarily). In most cases, I never even saw unarmored use of half-sword techniques because it shortens your reach too much and exposes your hands. Even with gauntlets on, there are parts of your hand that are easy to target and very scary to get hit in (basically the top and bottom of the hand - it hurts like crazy and with a sharp it could definitely disable your hand, possibly for life).
But yeah, if you and your opponent are fully armored in plate - if you're stuck using a sword - half-swording is basically the only way to have any affect on the target at all. If you're unarmored and your opponent is fully armored... I mean, just run away. You're dead 100% of the time.
Forgive me for prattling. I think everyone knows by now that I love this subject quite dearly. Feel free to ignore me.
