Moderator: Belegarth: Forum Moderators
Bishop wrote:Overall I believe the article was positive for our image, loosely defining us as a sadomasochist anti-larp. I'm ok with that. http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/LARP-harder
Caleidah wrote:But, his sensei passed that style down to him! Literal hours of tradition!
Penn QST? Those are what I use to build arrows these days. Plithut's passed at chaos with no problem.Remy the Wroth wrote:I would like to know if the Penn brand foam tennis balls pass as arrow heads. I have 12 Forged Foam arrow kits and two of the tennis balls and I would like to double check to see if arrows with these heads pass.
Bishop wrote:Overall I believe the article was positive for our image, loosely defining us as a sadomasochist anti-larp. I'm ok with that. http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/LARP-harder
Caleidah wrote:But, his sensei passed that style down to him! Literal hours of tradition!
Bishop wrote:Overall I believe the article was positive for our image, loosely defining us as a sadomasochist anti-larp. I'm ok with that. http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/LARP-harder
Caleidah wrote:But, his sensei passed that style down to him! Literal hours of tradition!
Spike wrote:This is the funniest thing I've ever read on these boards and the rest of you are bad at things generally, too.
Tiberius Claudius wrote:I don't get cosplay. It's like a weekend-long Halloween in a hotel where everyone gets the herp, but there's no candy.
I'm bothered by this....One of my realm members also had his arrows fail because of an insignificant amount of the curved ball poking through the template. Had to uncover them and shave them down. If a sword with semi-circular tip and radius of 1.5 inches can pass regardless of it passing through template, I think one of these safe arrows should as well.Ryu wrote:Had a ton of the QSt 36 arrows fail for template this year a chaos, when you build them make sure you cut a little bit off the round edge.
Not an issue. We're talking fractions of fractions of an inch barely passing through. I've been hit plenty directly in the eye and there's no more danger from it than from a flat arrow.Big King Jimmy wrote:An arrow head comes at my face perpendicular to the plane of my eyeball, with a 2 foot+ shaft behind it to drive it into my eyeball.
You're **** retarded. The fronts of arrows should be flat.
This I've seen and agree with, the tennis balls do have a lot of bounce back.Cyric wrote:All those arrows had really bad bounceback during Chaos arrow check. I shot one, it hit and flew back at face level from 15 feet away. They hit nice, but the bounceback is really dangerous.
Tiberius Claudius wrote:Not an issue. We're talking fractions of fractions of an inch barely passing through. I've been hit plenty directly in the eye and there's no more danger from it than from a flat arrow.Big King Jimmy wrote:An arrow head comes at my face perpendicular to the plane of my eyeball, with a 2 foot+ shaft behind it to drive it into my eyeball.
You're **** retarded. The fronts of arrows should be flat.
Cyric wrote:I hardly think that arrows that fit into your eye socket an "insignificant reason" for failing. The first day i saw those arrows they fit about a half inch into the template, and thus your eye.
A half inch is too much, but 1/8" or less which I have witnessed fail is perfectly fine for me to have shot at me. Yes, I'm willing to allow that on the field and be shot at. As said before, I've been shot in the eye directly with one of these multiple times over this fighting season and I'm ok with it.Orokusan wrote:He shaved an eight of an inch off with a razor blade and came back
Reverend wrote:In other words, you are saying that you don't agree with weapon checkers who follow the rules as written? That your friend's failing arrow should have been passed despite it not complying with the rules?
I don't personally agree with the decision when so many other things that are written in the rules are arbitrarily accepted with a nonchalant 'meh, close enough'. Personally, I'm all for 'close enough' in weapons check and the freedom for checkers to make those decisions so long as it isn't a flagrant and obvious safety hazard. But the idea that these arrows need such a miniscule amount of foam shaved off to supposedly go from 'ZOMG THERE'S A STICK IN MY BRAIN' to 'cool dude, nice shot' is not convincing to me.Cyric wrote:Mercifully, this falls under weapon checker discretion
Bishop wrote:Overall I believe the article was positive for our image, loosely defining us as a sadomasochist anti-larp. I'm ok with that. http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/LARP-harder
Caleidah wrote:But, his sensei passed that style down to him! Literal hours of tradition!
Tiberius Claudius wrote:Reverend wrote:In other words, you are saying that you don't agree with weapon checkers who follow the rules as written? That your friend's failing arrow should have been passed despite it not complying with the rules?I don't personally agree with the decision when so many other things that are written in the rules are arbitrarily accepted with a nonchalant 'meh, close enough'. Personally, I'm all for 'close enough' in weapons check and the freedom for checkers to make those decisions so long as it isn't a flagrant and obvious safety hazard. But the idea that these arrows need such a miniscule amount of foam shaved off to supposedly go from 'ZOMG THERE'S A STICK IN MY BRAIN' to 'cool dude, nice shot' is not convincing to me.Cyric wrote:Mercifully, this falls under weapon checker discretion
I do agree, however, that bounceback with these tennis balls is a very legitimate issue.
One of my realm members also had his arrows fail because of an insignificant amount of the curved ball poking through the template.
Cyric wrote:I hardly think that arrows that fit into your eye socket an "insignificant reason" for failing. The first day i saw those arrows they fit about a half inch into the template, and thus your eye. I don't know about you, but i'm not comfortable with an arrow going a half inch into my eye. Mercifully, this falls under weapon checker discretion. When the arrows came back the next day trimmed down they weren't as bad, but the high tape on them caused them to bounce back dangerously.
Derian wrote:Well, ****. Par is right.
Bishop wrote:Overall I believe the article was positive for our image, loosely defining us as a sadomasochist anti-larp. I'm ok with that. http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/LARP-harder
Caleidah wrote:But, his sensei passed that style down to him! Literal hours of tradition!
Remy the Wroth wrote:Utilizing paragraphs would help too. Wall of text with little understanding of grammar make my eyes wish they'd be taken out by an arrow form bounce back.
Bishop wrote:Overall I believe the article was positive for our image, loosely defining us as a sadomasochist anti-larp. I'm ok with that. http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/LARP-harder
Caleidah wrote:But, his sensei passed that style down to him! Literal hours of tradition!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests