Moderator: Belegarth: Forum Moderators
1.1.1. Striking Surface - Padded surface of a Weapon designed to make contact with an opponent during combat. Only the Striking Surface of a Weapon may score a hit.
1.1.2. Non-striking Surface – Any padded surface of the Weapon that is not a striking surface.
...
1.3.1. All striking surfaces of Weapons must be padded adequately to prevent personal injury when striking an opponent with full force on that surface.
1.3.2. All non-striking surfaces must be padded adequately to prevent personal injury from incidental contact.
Big Jimmy wrote:I drive my flail as hard as I can onto the top of your shield, and the flail hits you it's padded for it. You're fine, I'm fine, what's the big deal?
Elebrim wrote:"Body check?" Way to use a straw man, Jimmothy. Besides, that would be you blocking the flail shot, not them screwing up.Big Jimmy wrote:I drive my flail as hard as I can onto the top of your shield, and the flail hits you it's padded for it. You're fine, I'm fine, what's the big deal?
(Emphasis mine.)
There's the difference. Into the shield, in which case the ball is what hits the shoulder and any haft contact is in fact incidental. Regardless of a shield, many fighters aim with the haft and not the ball, slamming someone with it and then expect the ball to count. That is clearly an illegal and dangerous shot being used to justify a legal shot.
Big Jimmy wrote:I drive my flail as hard as I can onto the top of your shield, and the flail haft hits your shoulder it's padded for it. You're fine, I'm fine, what's the big deal?
Big Jimmy wrote:Aegis, what are people using as haft padding in your neck of the woods?
Bortas wrote:Two things:
1) If somebody clubs you with a real stick that has a chain at the end, is it going to do any less damage than without the chain/ball? A baseball bat upside the short ribs would suck. Point being: incidental padding or not, it would damage you, take the * hit. As others have said, there is almost no time when a hit with the haft would not also be a hit with the ball.
2) The incidental padding on a flail should be padded AND CHECKED as if people were going to crank each other with the haft, because they can AND WILL.... and usually not on purpose.
-bort
Again- Wrong- thanks for playing. It is the way the rules were designed.
Wow- so why do you think they check it??? Because "...That's just the way our rules work..." NO- because it IS a safty issue. Why check pommels???? DUH- do you strike with a pommel??? NO! but we still ckeck them.
Many of the 'incicental' padding ONLY had to be one layer. Flails got increased due to the HUGE increase of haft shots. As a matter of ACTAUL fact- we almost made it wher the 'haft' padding was as safe as any striking surface DUE to safety and to ensure the weapon was safe. "Incidental' padding on other weapons (one layer) often breaks down fast- one good block and it can dent it to the core.
Big Jimmy wrote:Satanaka, the "I'm right because I'm old" argument is a load of crap. Angmarth may not have been fighting for as long as you, I'm honestly not sure, but you can't tell me he's not a vet, and he disagree with you.
Satanaka wrote:Big Jimmy wrote:Satanaka, the "I'm right because I'm old" argument is a load of crap. Angmarth may not have been fighting for as long as you, I'm honestly not sure, but you can't tell me he's not a vet, and he disagree with you.
Angmarth- Yes- less time than me.....
BUT saying that a flail should be used to hit with the haft " ....because they can AND WILL....." and me remarking about "I can NOT believe ANYONE that has been fighting for any cumulative amount of time whould say something like this."
I still feel this is true. I do not condone nor encourage people to use illegal shots, or to strike with illegal striking surfaces. (or "non-striking surfaces)
Now are you saying that Angmarth does, Jimmy? Or that you do?
Angmarth wrote:I don't recall saying anything about "condoning" using the use of non-striking surfaces, however... I really don't think it matters all that much if you get hit with them. The rules are made in such a way that as long as they are followed with regards to construction, there shouldn't be a problem. People are going to get hit with non-striking surfaces and blade flats. Those people are probably (more than 90% in my estimation) going to take that hit. Furthermore, probably 60%+ of heralds watching a fight would also call the hit good even tho you were clubbed like a baby seal with the non-striking surface. It is the nature of the way our weapons are built and how our combat works. For the same reason we say, "Shield contact to the head is discouraged", we also say "hitting with the haft or flat does not count as an injury". In either case, we refrain from saying something is FORBIDDEN. It just doesn't make any sense to put another "head shot" (something completely prohibited by the rules) into the combat system.
Soo Ma Tai wrote:If the haft touches me, the hit is no good. Sweet, I will never have to tak another flail shot again, Ill just block the haft with my arm and call haft, who care where your ball hits. Talk about a con o' worms to open.
Big Jimmy wrote:Good, I'm glad you're not the **** crazy old man I thought you were. Just the crazy old man.
Satanaka wrote:HA!!!!! oh- I am gonna get you for that! hehehehehehehe
you make sure to get on my "parley" list for Octoberfest!!
Dagganoth wrote:"Did you get hit in a target area with legitimate force in a target area?"
Return to Rules Discussion And Development
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests