Belegarth

by **bahamunt** » Fri May 16, 2003 12:28 pm

why exactly is the age restriction 16? wouldnt 14 just be better? (i know this sounds kinda byass cus im not 16 yet but just wondering) :unsure:

i decided to add a poll.

by **Sonus** » Fri May 16, 2003 12:36 pm

The age is 16 because most of us figure if your 16, you can drive to events, have a job to get your own equip. and to be honest, 14 year olds(at least in my realm) are quite a bit less mature than people 16 and over. Granted there are definately a few exceptions. I would however fully support a 'hobbit' division for the younger people. I think it would be a necessity for it to be strongly-supervised though.

by **Kyrax** » Fri May 16, 2003 2:39 pm

The age restriction applies to inter-realm events, but realms are allowed to choose to set lower age limits for their own events. Among the realms with lower limits, I believe that Dur Demarion in Nashville, TN allows participants as young as 13.

BTW - congratulations for asking this question for the n-th time, but at least it is the first time that it was asked on the new board.

by **Winfang** » Fri May 16, 2003 2:49 pm

Think about it this way. I'm 6'3" and 250lbs. and your only 14 year old that is only 5'4" 120lbs (I'm just making this up). I'm swinging a red sword at a shield (swinging very hard, its got to be a hard hit to break a shield) and you accidently step in front of the sword. That is a risk that I don't want to have to when I step on the field. I don't want to pull my shots because I don't want to injure you. There have been cases where kids (13 years old) have been injured in the past on the field by grown adults and it's just too risky.

16 is the age in most states when you get your 1st state issused ID. It's an age where many people have stop developing also. Parents are more understanding if their 16 year old gets injured when they're playing a full-contact sport with adults then there 13 year old. We don't want parents sueing us because Johnny got hit in the head because he stepped in front of a red sword meant to hit a shield.

by **bahamunt** » Fri May 16, 2003 2:55 pm

add 30 pounds and 4 inches and thats the smallest guy with us.

by **varadin** » Fri May 16, 2003 3:01 pm

I have a couple of friends that are around 14 that try and fight when we are at peoples house fing around. Its not only a chance of us hurting them, its the fact that they cant hit hard enough half the time. I have a red with enough weight behind it that you dont have to baseball swing always to feel it on a shield. My freind was steping into it with it and i would hardly take it with it. Maybe he is jsut weak but still.

by **Owen** » Fri May 16, 2003 4:58 pm

I myself have it at 14 in my realm 16 for national events. 14 is a freshman in high school the perfect age to start fighting.

by **bahamunt** » Fri May 16, 2003 9:52 pm

thats why i think we should be able to fight at 14

by **Poeir** » Fri May 16, 2003 9:55 pm

Owen,

If Warrior Challenge on PBS is to be believed, at 14 a boy would become a page, and begin the path to knighthood. Seems appropriate, if that's the case. (And then at 18, squire, 21, knight)

by **bahamunt** » Fri May 16, 2003 10:08 pm

so its also historically acurate?

by **Andrek** » Fri May 16, 2003 10:14 pm

I don't like to have little guys on the field when there are alot of adult fighters. Lets face it, if all of my 260 lbs+ lands on your ribcage it will break every bone in your body. For me it is a case by case situation.

by **Ora** » Fri May 16, 2003 10:18 pm

Reminder:
1) Safety
2) Playability
3) Realism

by **Poeir** » Fri May 16, 2003 10:19 pm

Zechs Merquise wrote:so its also historically acurate?

If Warrior Challenge is to be believed. Which reminds me, one of the guys said that he'd do that every weekend if he could. I believe it was Mick. So I need to find a way to contact him, because there's this sport I think he'd be interested in. Perhaps you've heard of it.

Andrek wrote:I don't like to have little guys on the field when there are alot of adult fighters. Lets face it, if all of my 260 lbs+ lands on your ribcage it will break every bone in your body. For me it is a case by case situation.

Well, maybe. I'm going to have to agree that deciding on a case-by-case basis is comparatively wise, although I doubt landing on a ribcage only will break every bone in the body. Besides, they're young, it will heal quicker.

Actually, I'm surprised I wasn't been more injured, considering when I started this I was a whopping 5' 8", 125 lbs. And fleet of foot. I move so much slower and weigh so much more now.

Ora wrote:Reminder:
1) Safety
2) Playability
3) Realism

"These are the pillars by which we live and die."
I just wanted to add that.

by **Xipher** » Sat May 17, 2003 12:14 am

The two major reasons that haven't been stated that come to mind are that not only are you more likely to be injured temporarilly, but your body hasn't stopped developing yet and it's much easier to inflict serious injury that will last a lifetime. Join injuries are especially likely to not completely heal and will haunt you the rest of your life. The second thing not mentioned yet is liability. It's much easier to get insurance for events where the participants are 16 and over than for 14 and over. You should know that even though the minimum age limit is 16, there really aren't that many people under 18 that come to events. This is probably due parent's not wanting their children going to events and a lack of funds and transportation.

by **Tor** » Sat May 17, 2003 12:51 am

Poeir wrote:Owen,

If Warrior Challenge on PBS is to be believed, at 14 a boy would become a page, and begin the path to knighthood. Seems appropriate, if that's the case. (And then at 18, squire, 21, knight)

...and dead at 40, too.

That means all of our veteran fighters are dead.

by **Ora** » Sat May 17, 2003 9:27 am

I don't see the age issue ever coming down to a case-by-case issue. Many would argue favoritism. What would be the standards? Amusement park standards? -- you must be 'this tall' and weigh 'this much' to participate. Changing it to the amusement park standards now would most likely throw in the discrimination factor. There are many people under the age of 16 who participate in rugged sports such as football, rugby, and martial arts who would argue that they are more physically fit than people over 16, even if they aren't 'this tall' or weigh 'this much'. I've seen some 14 year olds who are taller and overall larger than some 18+ year olds. What would be your determining factors for judging people case-by-case?

by **faline** » Sat May 17, 2003 5:25 pm

14 is a great age. Not grown up enough to have to have a job, but grown up enough to make your own choices and go about your life, but like Xipher said, if some poor kid gets run down by a person twice their size and breaks their knee or something, a lot of bad crap could come of it.

At that age, a persons growth plates aren't done growing yet, which makes surgery very tricky. If something goes wrong, the kid could be stunted for life. If almost happened to me when I broke my knee four years ago.

It just seems like an asanine idea to let children run around with people who are 6'4", 250 swinging things at them.

by **Sir Gheldar** » Sun May 18, 2003 7:29 am

Winfang wrote:only 5'4" 120lbs (I'm just making this up).

HAY I'm right there! And I know of other folks in the game, old enough yet on the smaller side, which takes the chance against you big folks. Middle Earth (in the past) allowed Hobbits but it was based more on the individual rather than age. There size was a large factor. We had folks start a 13 again depending on the person. Just my 2 cents.

by **varadin** » Sun May 18, 2003 8:24 am

Ora wrote:Reminder:
1) Safety
2) Playability
3) Realism

no no no
1 saftey
2 looking good
3 playability
4 realism

you forgot the most important step

by **Sir Killian** » Sun May 18, 2003 12:59 pm

i have been fighting amtgard lately as of the fact gondor is like 50 miles north of me.....

the kingdom here has no real age limit.. well i dont tap with the amtgard boys... they really dont like fighting me..

but this little kid tried to kill me and i nailed him in the chest then as a follow thru i hit em in the back... the kid went down like a sack of potatos

it wasnt pretty....

the only reason is safety....

by **Forkbeard** » Sun May 18, 2003 1:36 pm

I only let 14 year olds fight if their parents are PRESENT at the event. Otherwise its 15. 16 for natioal events is fine.
I think having small folks on the field sucks because I invariably take it easy on them, then get stabbed in the back for it. lately I've been polily killing them quickly just to get them out of the way.
fb

by **Necronos** » Sun May 18, 2003 6:31 pm

I too take it a bit easier when young ones are on the field... and like Forkbeard I am getting backstabbed for my efforts. Now I have to take them out first or else grow eyes on the back of my head...

by **The Lost Celt** » Sun May 18, 2003 6:46 pm

Zechs Merquise wrote:so its also historically acurate?

Yeah, and if said squire accidentally got ran over by a horse I'm sure they'd sue the living **** outta the Knight too...

Historical accuracy means **** as far as current laws are involved.

*, some people....

Forkbeard wrote:I only let 14 year olds fight if their parents are PRESENT at the event. Otherwise its 15. 16 for natioal events is fine.

I gotta say that's probably the most intelligent way I can think of someone handling it, though there's probably not many realms willing to go to that length for minors.

Winfang wrote: Think about it this way. I'm 6'3" and 250lbs. and your only 14 year old that is only 5'4" 120lbs (I'm just making this up). I'm swinging a red sword at a shield (swinging very hard, its got to be a hard hit to break a shield) and you accidently step in front of the sword. That is a risk that I don't want to have to when I step on the field.

Okay, honest question here - I'm 21 years old, 5'6 and 140 pounds, does someone of this stature concern you on the field or is it more about the age? Probably don't have to ask the question - I've accidentally sent a 15 year old airborne once when he shieldrushed me once (instinct) and felt like a complete prick for about half an hour

by **Ora** » Sun May 18, 2003 8:56 pm

Admittedly, we (Dur-Demarion) have some new kids in our group who are 13yrs old and, quite frankly, they're very small for their age. Dur-Demarion's age limit is 13 and these guys are on the field and one of their mothers is present every day they're there. However, IMHO, there's a big difference between local battle practices where situations are a bit more "controlled" -- 15-50 fighters on the field -- opposed to events such as Armageddon where things are not so controlled -- potentially upwards of 400 people on the field. I can understand the concern of the more veteraned and the larger fighters on the field when it comes to this age situation. There were concerns voiced at Beltaine when these boys took to the field. Many people were worried that they were going to hurt these kids and felt that they could not fully "battle" as they normally would. As a parent myself, I will be very cautious about allowing The Squooshinator onto the practice field when she turns 13, let alone on the field at events... thank goodness I still have 6 more years to worry about it! She's already a very aggressive fighter so you old fogies better beware!

by **Derian** » Sun May 18, 2003 10:04 pm

I think we should still keep the national age limit at sixteen. Although I believe it can be based on a case to case basis (theoretically). As of now, I'm sixteen, 5' 10" and about 165 lbs. I was on the field at 'fest last October, and was certainly able to hold my own and match up to the big guys. At Melcaorme last month, I was certainly able to match up to the big guys again.

Nan Belegorn allows 14 year olds to fight, and there are some that I think could fight on a national field. There are also sixteen year olds that would get the **** stomped out of them.

I know full well that the national age limit probably will never be changed. However, I think in most realms, like Ora said, in "controlled" environments younger fighters can be allowed. However on much larger scale battles, it should be kept to sixteen because by this age, most people will have the physical/mental maturity to handle it.

by **Andrek** » Mon May 19, 2003 1:32 am

The Lost Celt wrote:Okay, honest question here - I'm 21 years old, 5'6 and 140 pounds, does someone of this stature concern you on the field or is it more about the age? Probably don't have to ask the question - I've accidentally sent a 15 year old airborne once when he shieldrushed me once (instinct) and felt like a complete prick for about half an hour

The difference between you and a 14 year old who is the same size is that a fourteen year old does not have the life experience to know that if they rush a man over 6' full speed that they will get the force of the swing and the force of the run crammed into one swipe. I don't think you would try to rush a guy FB's size full on, where a kid might (an ego thing). I do let kids that have a high amount constitution out on the field when there aren't alot of fighters (less than 25), but only with parental waivers signed. If there are more than 25 I look at how well the kid has been handling themselves and if I think they can play with the big dogs I let them. Oh, and everyone in Ered Duath must sign waivers. Just for saftey. Where can I get this "insurance" for events?

by **Cidion** » Mon May 19, 2003 7:52 am

I agree with those above, keep it at 16.

by **Calarn the Black** » Mon May 19, 2003 12:32 pm

I said no for two reasons. First, there is a greater risk of lawsuits becuase of injury, waiver or no waiver. (Trust me, a good lawyer can get around a waiver, I've seen it happen with some sports and colleges) Secondly, because they're younger and less mature, they may use some fighting practices considered unsafe, and thus there is a greater risk of them injuring someone else. Imagine a 14 year old swinging a red weapon straight down into someone's skull because they think it's cute...end result, concussion.
Now that I think of it, you need to be a bit older to develop the skills neccessary to build legal weapons in the first place.

Calarn the Black

by **Kurgan** » Tue May 20, 2003 2:41 am

I'm still 15, but from what I've read I would have to agree to keep the age limit at 16. I for one am 6' and 230 lbs, not exactly your average high school freshmen. Yet I've fought younger kids even less than a year younger than me who don't take into consideration the safty factor behind everything and I've had to give many pep talks about things like that.

by **LaVindar The Terrible** » Tue May 20, 2003 2:35 pm

I'm 14 and I think the Age restriction sucks!!!

by **bahamunt** » Tue May 20, 2003 2:54 pm

learn to express urself better and then talk i think it sucks too but suport ur idea. i think that the restriction should not be a set age but should be on the size/weight/maturity of the person because ive seen 16 year olds smaller than 14 year olds and vice a versa thats why i think the age thing should be changed on a case by case basis instead of just being set at 16.

by **bahamunt** » Tue May 20, 2003 3:05 pm

while most people think that most 14-15 year olds are not big enough or mature enough i think that there are exceptions to this rule i for one know what my body can and cannot take and would not do something as stupid as shield rush or charge someone twice my size. i also would not care if people DID NOT go easy on me.

by **Kyrax** » Tue May 20, 2003 4:22 pm

Guys,

The age restriction for participating at major events is not going to change no matter how much you dislike it. Nobody is arguing with you that there are some under 16 who are big enough and emotionally mature enough to take part, just as there are those over 15 (or 25) who aren't.

Like I said in one of the first replies, this is an issue that gets raised every few months when the next sub-sixteen year old suddenly realizes that they are being discriminated again. Don't get frustrated that we aren't jumping to agree with you, because we've heard all of these arguments before and the issue has been settled for years. Because this is a full contact sport, with all of the potential risks that such an activity entails, some kind of limit has to be set and enforced. If you think that Belegarth has put up an unreasonable barrier to your participation, I'd suggest that you try to fight in the SCA where the age minimim is 18 AND you have to spend huge amounts of money on armor for safety.

The flip side of that restriction is that nothing stops you and your friends from making weapons and getting together to practice fighting. Many realms will allow you, with written parental permission, to participate in their local events. If you start working on this now, in a few years you will be experienced veteran fighters with reflexes and speed to kick our behinds for making you wait so long.

by **bahamunt** » Tue May 20, 2003 7:33 pm

ill take u up on that... i now know why this is such a risk, sorry for this mishap

by **xiao** » Sun May 25, 2003 10:11 am

I started fighting when I was 15, although i had no idea these events exists i still fought with all my friends, we had our moms drive us to the hardware store...buy pvc/duct tape yada yada, we still had a great time with our 15 hobbit army. if you can get organized enough have your own event! then when your crew hits the age limit, you have yourself a unit. yay!
....for the poll, 16 is good, gives the young fighters something to look forward to.

by **bahamunt** » Sun May 25, 2003 10:29 am

just make sure not to change it to 18!!!

by **Visgoth the Barbarian** » Wed May 28, 2003 1:16 pm

i think 16 is a good age. i am 14 and i could take it but some people in my unit probably couldnt

by **Zwei ap Owen** » Wed May 28, 2003 3:51 pm

Yeah, I just hate all these * kids running around and raising a ruckus in my sport.

by **Tor** » Wed May 28, 2003 4:12 pm

Also, the reason this rule will never change is the younger crowd will eventually reach the appropriate age, making the point moot.

by **Sgt. Kiff Skitterzz** » Thu May 29, 2003 9:47 am

16 is a good age, because it keeps mostly mature. And most developed people on the field. 14 year old's are prone to breaking and being clumsy anyways. :goblin:

by **Elerosse** » Thu May 29, 2003 2:56 pm

me and my friends are all 14 or fifteen and i hvae to agree that some people are very immature, they get * off way to easily. we may come to liek chaos wars just to get a fell for what it is actually like but we understand the reasons for the age being 16

by **bahamunt** » Thu May 29, 2003 3:25 pm

this just gave me an idea... hey why dont we have junior events that where runned by more experienced people any questions or comments?

by **Visgoth the Barbarian** » Thu May 29, 2003 4:34 pm

thats a good idea but there would also have to be a little more strict saftey rules

by **Sir Killian** » Fri May 30, 2003 12:11 am

i only wish i could have started fighting when i was 14....

young guys.... use the following years to become a foam fighting ninja...

train hard then come to a national event and slap ho's like it aint no thang....

by **Tyrus The Terrible** » Fri May 30, 2003 6:52 am

I'm 14, and I really think the age restriction sucks. come on, and don't go on about how 16 year olds are more mature because I've known 16 year olds and some of them act like jack offs. So I was thinking and i think the age restriction should stay the same but realms can make exeptions for 14 and 15 year olds.

by **Ora** » Fri May 30, 2003 7:50 am

Tyrus -- and anyone else who's reading this and doesn't already realize this -- there are acceptions made, but by individual realms. Dur-Demarion, for one, has an age limit of 13. But, the majority of the realms and for Armageddon the age limit was set a long time ago at 16. I really don't think you're going to convince anyone to change their minds about that, but you're welcome to try, but you'd probably have better luck going through your Armageddon War Council representative.

by **bahamunt** » Fri May 30, 2003 12:01 pm

tyrus, Eleross? Falassion, and LaVindar. Where are u guys at? maybe we could get together and organize some kind of junior multi realm event?

by **Nor** » Thu Jun 12, 2003 12:18 am

Okay I think it should personally because I'm a 14 year old... true that 16 year is more mature and have more experience but I mean some 14 year olds are more mature then 16 year olds and I personally think it should be 14 if not that then 15 because I DONT WANT TO WAIT TWO YEARS TO GET INTO NATION WIDE MEETS! I think I said my share :angel:

by **Emerson Bridges** » Thu Jun 12, 2003 11:52 pm

I started swordfighting with friends and my brothers with wooden swords when I was in 3rd grade(I'm 20 now). I continued to fight from then on.

I'm 6 ft but only 150 lbs and I fight my friend david(6'3" 280 lbs).

I'm all for more fighters, if it is safe, but you guys should research and compile information before you expect real results on something like this. I suggest you:

1. Contact someone that practices law and ask them about waivers and insurance for 14 and 15 year olds. See how complex and difficult this problem is.

2. Talk to experienced Heralds about what they would require to feel comfortable having 14 and 15 year olds on the national event fields.

Things to suggest to Heralds:

A. Maybe if all 14 and 15 year olds were REQUIRED to wear protective gear Heralds would be much more comfortable with them on the field. You could wear knee pads and elbow pads and head protection.

B. Maybe if all 14 and 15 year olds could ONLY be archers(use bow+crossbow+javelins+rocks) Heralds would feel much more comfortable.

C. 14/15 year olds may not initiate grapples.

D. Maybe 14/15 year olds would have to follow A+B+C.

E. Maybe create a 14/15 year old division that fights apart from the older fighters.

F. Ask about doing A+C+E.

Whatever you do don't say most of the things you have been saying above. If you try to argue with most of your points above you will lose any arguements. I gaurantee it. I also think that the above suggestions are some really good suggestions. I wouldn't be surprised if they let 14/15 year olds only be archers and be required to wear protective gear for national events.

by **bahamunt** » Fri Jun 13, 2003 1:29 pm

if 14 15 year olds could only use ranged weapons i would be okay with it. it would also be cool to just have junior regements where only 14 15 year olds could fight.

Belegarth

Age Restrictions?

should the age limit for national events be changed to 14?

Age Restrictions?

reasons

Re: Why I said no

Facts and logic vs wanting

Who is online