Uruk-Hai Helm 3.0

[Cade]

This will be the third Uruk helm i have built over the past couple years. After selling the last two i decided that i needed another one, so here it is.

Aside from sealing it, it is finished and ready for action. With this helm i decided to take pictures at each stage of construction for personal reasons and after realized that these images could be useful for people building helms of their own.

For a full list of all 30+ images of the helm, visit this link to facebook. The permissions should be set correctly for everyone to be able to view it...
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/fbx/?set=a.1694926528718.2094921.1104456237&l=4775c5cc96

[Fangesta]

you just made me touch myselved innapropriately!






I LOVE IT!

[varadin]

sucks that is fails

3.4. Armor may not have protrusions that rise more than 1/2 inch from the surface.

looks good though.

[Cade]

sucks that is fails

3.4. Armor may not have protrusions that rise more than 1/2 inch from the surface.

looks good though.

Thanks V, glad you like it.

You are absolutely correct, its fails under the letter of the law for Belegarth. I'm not going to argue the point here on the armor forums, I knew that when i built it.

Dagorhir's ruleset adds the word Rigid in there which lets it pass for Dag since none of the spikes are rigid, and in fact after the question was raised, i stabbed myself with them to see what would happen and they just bend. Granted they probably wouldn't do the eye any favors, but the point remains, they are not rigid.

"5.1.14 - Rigid body armor including helmets must not have projections which protrude more than 1/2 inch from the armor."

You could always fail it under the safety rule which states that anything deemed unsafe can be and should be pulled off the field.

I am well aware that this helm won't pass everywhere, and im perfectly fine with that. I do have other helms i can wear that pass the letter of the law in Bel as well. In the meantime ill just be sure not to take it to an event or practice that you are heralding at

[Arrakis]

Also, you mentioned that the leather isn't thick enough to pass on its own, so it fails for thickness anywhere it isn't doubled, too.

[Thorondor]

sucks that is fails

3.4. Armor may not have protrusions that rise more than 1/2 inch from the surface.

looks good though.

Sucks that you're going to have to tell a bunch of people their leather armor fail for this reason then...

But this isn't the thread for that.

Nice helm Kade :-)

[Cade]

Also, you mentioned that the leather isn't thick enough to pass on its own, so it fails for thickness anywhere it isn't doubled, too.

Its doubled up everywhere actually.

I had mentioned that the base was six ounce. If you look on the inside of the helm via the facebook link, you can see that it is doubled up everywhere now.

[Arrakis]

Why do the pictures you posted to this thread show clearly un-doubled areas (back edge visible in first picture, et al.)? Are these pictures of the helm in some prior state?

[Cade]

Sorry i should have clarified. Not all of the leather is six ounce. The back plate is 12 ounce as is the rim of the helm and the spikes on top.

The base of the faceplate is six ounce, but the chompy face on top of it is 12 ounce. If you look under it, there are two panels on the backside of the cheeks that are 12 ounce which help keep its shape.

The dome of the helm is all six ounce, but is doubled up with alternating layers.

[Fangesta]

Rumbeard made an actual Uruk-Hai helmet from the LOTR...friggen awesome!! He was forced to cut down the jaw horns though, but even though now it's not true to scale it still looks like he wanted it.

[Soo Ma Tai]

And that helm looks freaking badass Fangy.

[Alunsun]

Looks awesome brah. Props.

[Forkbeard]

You can make the horns on top 2 piece that connect via chicago screws. I have had great success with thicker, shorter leather protrutions at bel events. Especialy when I keep them slighty angled in. You could have short base horns and bolt on the extentions when you want to look extra scary somewhere that allows it. Same with the teeth.
Sweet helmet.
fb

[Exile_Bear]

I'm working on re-designing my helm and this post as well as others have brought me to this question.

What makes the helm originally posted in this thread illegal due to the 1/2" protrusion rule versus this other helm fork posted in another thread? I kind of like fork's design and am wanting to emulate parts of the design below. At what point is something a protrusion versus part of the armor?

[Teej]

The nasal piece is not protruding... the plate on the forehead is "webbed." Thus, the things that look like "spikes" from the side are actually quite shallow in between.

See: background

[Kael Prime]

Dude that helm is **** amazing, very nice work.

[Cade]

I think the point he is making is that despite it being webbed, its still protruding more than half an inch from the helm. And according to the letter of the rule that was being tossed around earlier in the thread, it technically can be failed for that reason. It won't of course, Now, its not really up to anyone here online, its up to the weapons checkers who are heralding at the event.

Actually most people don't apply the 1/2 inch rule to anything but rigid protrusions. I have two other helms with "tusks" similar to the ones on this helm that have passed everywhere i have ever taken them including Ockfest. In reality, helms are generally passed or failed based on how safe they are, not how far leather protrudes off them.

Rule 3.4 is a poorly worded rule. Originally it specified rigid protrusions, but at some point that part was dropped. The fun part of this rule is that weapons checkers can fail any helm by specifying any part of the helm as protruding from any other. On the flip side, i could argue that by the letter of the law the spikes are part of the helm and therefore not protruding from the helm since they are part of the helm.

Now, obviously they are protruding, but if someone was being a tool, i could make the argument to be a smartass.

"At what point is something a protrusion versus part of the armor?" To answer this question...its completely arbitrary and up to the weapon checker to decide this. I mean when you really think about it, a nasal guard is protruding as well...it simply lies along your nose as opposed to sticking up from the helm like a tusk or spike. Its still protruding.

Design your helm however you want and don't worry so much about it. If you have anything close to the helm you linked, you won't have any problems.

[varadin]

kade, you're in the wrong. You are trying to argue a point because you made something cool looking because of a rule you didn't agree with. Any weapon checkers that passes this helm is wrong, and should no longer be checking. The rules are the rules. While you may not agree with them as a weapons checker it is your duty to uphold them. If your realm doesn't play by the book of war thats your call and you can then change the rules. People must be aware of this IE Wolfpack and red flails, a few dag realm that allow metal elbows and such.

The fact is if you throw out this rule for your helmet to pass anyone can come up with a giant spiky helm or even shoulder armor of pain. You are obligated to pass these just like your helm. At the very least check it with the same attitude that "spikes aren't unsafe"

TLDR version: Cool cosplay helm, don't bring it on a field

[Forkbeard]

To explain the helm I made: I know very well that the crown is a little too spikey. That is specificaly why it is webbed. So the the points COULD be cut off and it would still have the same look, though I dont ever forsee there being any problems with it. I actually went to an Amtdude, so it doesnt matter.
I worry constantly about **** like that, however. I made that the way the customer wanted. Just about all the helms I make with protusions like that are by customer request. I warn them that they might have problems.
On another note, Weapon and armor checks are kind of relative. If I find the right guy at any event I could get that helm passed. Being who I am and all. But everybody cant count on that nepitism. I constantly advise people not to. Its a great way to disapoint yourself.
Last, I have to say that while you are right, Varadin, your also kind of wrong.
Passing this would in no way mean checkers would have to allow something else "like" it. I can tell one person yes and another no right in front of each other based on MY idea of safety. They cant argue. You cant argue with heralds. You just have to have the balls to look em in the eye and DO IT.
FB

[Tiberius Claudius]

...post moved to rules discussion...

[Thorondor]

Tiberius, somehow "rigid" got removed from that rule somewhere along the way...taking "rigid armor" to just "armor" and that's where my argument comes from. Leather that hasn't been hardened in any way is not really rigid armor.

[Teej]

OP: Great work though, I saw the mesh in the Dag forums. What color was it? It may be better black... it looked white-ish; however, that could be the flash. Have you considered the Batman trick? (Black paint/makeup around the eyes)

Uruks invented leather armor...

[Cade]

Its actually copper paint. And it looks awesome out in the sun where it reflects off the copper. However, in the shade you get that pic.

I'm replacing it with some safety goggle glass when i get a moment.

I could paint up, but im not really crazy about the idea. there would be cleanup after and whatnot. And whatever paint or die i used would get into the leather and rub off when i wasn't wearing facepaint. I think ill just stick with safety plastic.

As far as the rules discussion goes. Frankly im not going to argue the points. If it passes cool. If not...oh well, ill wear one of my other helms. It's not a huge deal. There are more than enough people on both sides of the argument and frankly i think the legalizing should be taken to the rules section where it belongs and left out of the armor forum.

I came here for feedback, and im not shamed to say, to brag a bit on what i built. Not to discuss its legality.