Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Syr Olaf]

If a weapon was passed at an event and goes onto the field and causes an injury. Is it safe?

What is a safe weapon?

Rule 4.1.3 - A safe Dagorhir weapon is one which when used as intended will NOT result in bruises, break bones, or knock out teeth if an unarmored person is struck with a full-strength swing.

Keeping mind these rules

3.3.4 - Head: Off limits to all weapon/shield strikes except yellow and white projectile weapons.

3.3.5 - Neck: Off limits to all weapon/shield strikes except yellow and white projectile weapons. NOTE: Neck is unaffected by hits from white projectile weapons.

Now if a weapon passes a weapons check at an event and then goes onto the field and causes an injury (bruises, break bones, or knock teeth) from the weapons striking surface. IT IS NOT SAFE!!!

Why are we allowing unsafe weapons onto the field? In last 2 years weapons i have seen and heard of alot more injuries in dag in general.

1)Weapons checkers: please check the weapons with a subjective mind and assume that biggest hardest hitting person may be swinging this sword at the smallest person full force. Just because a smaller person comes up with the weapon at weapons check it might not be theirs. It might be the biggest hardest person using it. Weapons need to be tested be safe in any fighters hands.

2)Fighters responsibility:  Check your weapon yourself. If its unsafe DO NOT TAKE IT TO CHECK. Either fix it or leave it in your bag. When you are fighting with a passed weapon every time you take a passed weapon on to the field or take a break check the weapon it. Make sure it is still safe to use. If not then take it off the field. Do not lend your unsafe weapons to friends to use. If you are bigger or harder hitting person make the extra effort to make the weapon lil softer for the smaller person.

3)heralds: If a person gets hurt on the field make sure it was not the weapon. please check the weapon or have a weapons checker check it.  If its unsafe make sure that it is removed from the field.

4)Opponents: Do not block shots with your open hands. If you try to grab a swinging weapon non striking surface. If you are not fast enough the striking surface could jamb or break your finger. You take that risk

A weapons striking surface that is safe will not cause injuries ( bruises, break bones, or knock out teeth). So if Jari hits with you properly with a passed weapon and you say ouch! It is either the weapon broke down and is unsafe, the weapon was not properly checked and passed safe, or you are a wussy. Its not because he hits too hard.

So please make dagorhir safer and lets stop this trend of harder weapons so that we all can have a long safe career in Dagorhir.

[Frothgar]

to add on to #2. if you bring all you weapons to check in a big bag or box or something. do not put all you fails into the bag with the passes, especially if your realm does not mark passed weapons each event.

[Judge Dredd]

Good post. It does seem that I am hearing more instances of injuries lately. I can tell you this. I WILL NOT BORROW ANY WEAPON FROM ANYONE IN DAG! I am fully aware of how hard I "can" hit, and have spent an enormous amount of time and effort into making my weapons safe when in my hands. This includes the efforts of Axe & Arrow to make sure I do not hurt you. The construction of my 12oz blue sword is VERY different than the 42oz blue sword designed specifically for me by Axe & Arrow. But I think the differences in their construction fully demonstrates what Olaf is saying.

The 12oz sword is made of stiffer foam, no matter how hard I swing, the foam will only squish so far. This results in a sting feeling when struck. The lack of mass allows for this to be safe, but at the top end of swing strength, will hurt but not injure you. This construction would not be safe for a heavier weapon as the lack of squish and the added mass would result in injury.

The 42oz is made with 2 types of foam providing progressive resistance or what feels like more squish but the max squish is reached before the core is felt. This is vitally important due to the overall mass of the weapon. At full swing, this is actually the safer weapon under one circumstance, and more dangerous in another.

If you punch block, you want me using the heavy, your fingers are safe due to progressive resistance. The lack of squish in the 12oz weapon will hurt more, but the lack of mass will save you from injury. Both are safe, but for different reasons.

If (as Olaf points out)

Do not block shots with your open hands. If you try to grab a swinging weapon non striking surface. If you are not fast enough the striking surface could jamb or break your finger. You take that risk

The risk from the heavy is greater than the light. Simply due to its mass.

The net result of having both weapons is that a light hit from the light weapon will feel more solid than the same shot with the heavy. This would allow me to (if I was so inclined) develop a style of fighting that would have me hitting lighter yet having my opponent think I am hitting harder with the light weapon. The trend in Dag is to use the light weight (not so squishy) foam to cover the cores of heavier weapons. And when I say heavier, I mean just a few ounces. The best fighters have discovered that the added mass of a 16-22 oz weapon will give them abundantly better parrying ability while not slowing their attack.

It is this trend that IMHO is causing the increased injuries we are experiencing. The foam is (even though the core is not coming through) not squishing enough to protect the opponent from injury due to the increased mass. A weapons checker might pick up 2 identical swords, constructed with the same foam and not notice that they have different masses (due to counter-weighting) resulting in one safe weapon on the field, and one dangerous weapon on the field.

We (weapons checkers) need to be vigilant in spotting this, or more people will be injured.

You (fighters) need to stop punch blocking or open hand blocking, or you will be injured. Even with good gloves. 

[Arrakis]

*sigh*

[Lady Krystal]

I agree with the sentiment from the original post, and perhaps it's only out here... but the vast majority of injuries we've sustained in this area haven't been from striking surfaces. They're incidental contact with weapons either during battle - or off on the sidelines. The two worst weapon-related injuries I can remember in the past several years were a broken nose to a person who was exiting the field and caught a deflected spear shaft to the face, and my husband's tooth was broken via a careless swinging of a spear on the sidelines.

Now please, no one take this as me trying to advocate spears getting the 'javelin treatment' for their courtesy padding! I'm just commenting on the fact that I've seen more injuries in this general area in regards to non-striking surfaces and things that weapons checkers cannot control via a good weapons checking practice, than I have weapons with questionable construction/failed striking surfaces (Shields bashing & checking/grappling/body checking all notwithstanding of course).

I won't get into injuries people are giving themselves by poor form/technique/or punch blocking either. To me, that's not use of a weapon as intended (as they aren't meant to aim for or target grounded feet or hands) and shouldn't be held against the wielder of the weapon, nor the construction.

[Judge Dredd]

*sigh*

OH god help me!!!
What?

[Oisín Leathshúileach]

*sigh*

OH god help me!!!
What?

You crossed the beams, dude.  The world's going to end and the dead be resurrected.

On topic . . .

Nice post, Olaf.

I disagree with your implied statement that there is, therefore, no such thing as too hard of a swing, I think there are certainly some individuals (perhaps many) who are capable of hitting "too hard" when they're swinging their 10.

And, tbh, I think it's a bit pie in the sky to believe that every weapon will be safe in the hands of every fighter.  Weapons checking is definately too lax, but unless you make weapons to light and fluffy as to be harmless it's unreasonable to expect every sword that hits the field to be safe in the hands of Gavin or Blackhawk (or etc) when they're swinging their max, and that the people who are capable of that level of force (many of whom aren't known for it because they generally don't swing to their max) need to take the responsibility to know their strength and use it responsibly.  Which, I'm glad to say, most do . . . but remember that every group has some douchebags and when people are being irresponsible they shouldn't be able to blame it on weapons check.

"Oh, hey, it's ok that I just delivered the hardest hit that I can to that archer chick's kidneys from behind when she didn't even see me . . . weapons check said my weapon is safe for full force!"  True story.

[Stellaria]

I'm thinking that Olaf is probably right that much of what we use today would have been failed for being too hard 10 years ago. We *do* use stiff foam that delivers a bit of sting on our weaponry, and nobody uses squishy stuff on their blades anymore. The argument is that it's not necessary, and that was outdated tech.....but then I hear stories from the longstanding vets about these monster weapons that could send you flying across the field but didn't hurt a bit to get hit with.

I *did* get seriously hurt by a weapon that passed check by the current standards in a realm I trust to check weapons correctly. And I don't think Mac was swinging at max when he was fighting me, either, because I *am* small and I know he's not as big a jerk as he tries to make himself out to be It was an accidental hit to an invalid target, but that was just hand-on-weapon which is not a rare occurrance.

[athelas]

Weapons checking is definately too lax

I guess it needs to be too lax if the populous is to be pleased. Look at the ****storm that happened at Rag XXV when the weapons checkers were being serious about failing dangerous weapons.

[Varadin]

I *did* get seriously hurt by a weapon that passed check by the current standards in a realm I trust to check weapons correctly. And I don't think Mac was swinging at max when he was fighting me, either, because I *am* small and I know he's not as big a jerk as he tries to make himself out to be It was an accidental hit to an invalid target, but that was just hand-on-weapon which is not a rare occurrance.

Stell. In my weapons bag each time i go to an event is an unsafe weapon i through into check. Its unsafe on my level of hit most people will pass it. I put it in as a general check to see what the weapons check is like. It was passed that day without a second thought. While they failed others of my weapons for pommel being hard on the side. It was a bad check.

Nothing but respect for checkers. But a bad check is about the same as no check in my eyes. Its important for a weapon to be safe in all hands on the field. Its why i grab only people i know for check, Since i know how hard their hard CAN be. A guy like Rune will nock your socks off with a red or spear, thus why i want him testing them on me at Harvest feast.

[Sir Mirelle of Narnia]

Varadin if you had believed that they were a bad check why didn't you say something then, instead of call them out now?

[Stellaria]

Good point, Mirelle.

[Varadin]

Honestly I did not think about it. Right after check I was distracted with something and by the time I solved it was too late to question anyone. So I let it sit in my bag with a passed sticked on it. Only reason i brought it up is because Stel mentioned something now. I also really am trying to not run my mouth at events, It either ends with someone upset or someone leaving in a huff.

It could be that it is a safe weapon, and that Macs is a safe weapon. I just know the me hitting someone with it will cause angry faces.

[Stellaria]

I think that this is what Olaf is getting at, though. It's not that weapon checking is lax, or even poorly done....it's that the accepted standards for what is too hard have changed gradually and we've reached a breaking point.
So.....time to speak up.

[Orrin None-son]

To many times I just see weapons checkers "going through the motions" and not really checking them. I ALWAYS set in a weapon or two that I KNOW fails. then when it gets passed, I point it out to the checkers and request they pay better attention. I have no issues getting rude.

[Varadin]

Too hard? we are looking at things different ways.

The weapon that I have that should have failed is too soft. It allows for too much core to transfer though. Old weapons cause injuries. New weapons Sting and slap more but cause less deep tissue injury.

Lets look at a certain brand of Red sword everyone hates. Im speaking from experience only and have done no honest to god test with this. I do Fight against them more then 90% of this board though I believe.

The standard min red from Voldemort comes with a stiff 2# foam that is 1.5 inches wide and roughly 3.25 inches wide. Comes with a solid half inch round fiberglass core. A stiff fabric cover (trigger) and is not counterweighted at all.

•Brand new they hit hard, a firm solid hit. This causes a bit of a welt and some pain.
•After about a month the Foam is worn in a bit, soften ups and hits solid, no welt is left and no bruise is left, there is still pain.
•After 2-3 months of use, the foam is worn down, with no compression they hit like a truck and you get hit with a TON of core. They Bruise and cause pain, sometimes injury. THIS WEAPON FAILS it needs to be rebladed.
•After a new reblade the weapon come back, it hits firm, but the core flexes a bit more allowing the weapon to not suck.

Every person out there seems to think that PAIN=Failing weapon. This is wrong, All weapons will cause pain the difference is they are not by the rules allowed to cause INJURY or bruise or break bones.

The weapons of old of Blackhawks tales, Were LARGE heavy weapons made mostly of open cell and marine foam. They allowed the weapon to hit, compress a great deal BEFORE the core, the foam did all the work. Thus they were large and soft and moved people. The best example i can think of a similar weapon to these are a GTG glaive. They have open cell over it allowing it to hit, cushion the blow and then still move you with firmer underlying denser foam. If you havent noticed they are also some of the larger headed glaives on the field.

If you want an epic weapon that tosses people and is safe, You cannot ride min specs or min weight as some people try to do.

edit: Remember there is such a thing as TOO hard, i am not saying its that. I just find id rather have a weapon be hard or firm then soft with small specs.

[Squire Ducky McFeelgood]

I find that... Yes, weapons checkers are generally too loose on enforcing standards and usually not willing to be the hard ass they need to be to discern the bad ones from the good ones. I also find that individuality/non-universalism on how we check (and how we build) allows for too many opinions on what is a passing weapon.

And then we usually choose a group/a group volunteers cause no else will do it/a group gets volun-asked, and then they begrudgingly show up early in the morning and force themselves to go through THOUSANDS of weapons, probably roughly around 4k. Usually there are only about 10 to 20 checkers. This moves us to Roughly 100 to 150 swords a person, and probably 20 shields a person.

And after they've done this for four days, they stop caring or they get volunteers/volun-tolds who don't care cause their names not on it, and it all goes to hell during the time when it should be the hardest (Friday and Saturday).

But on the other hand, i can build a perfectly safe weapon that will pass any check anywhere in the country, and then hurt you with it if i wanted to. With uncontrolled shots to ineligible target zones or using too much force to an area that can't take it (wrist, forearms, knees) and a lack of care cause someone told me I have a "safe weapon".

We should probably step away from this concept of a "safe weapon" and move more towards a concept of "Passing weapon for intended use". Cause none of them are truly safe. Flats will always hurt, a pommel always sucks, core from a spear will knock your teeth out, and a red can cause a concussion. But if I use all of those correctly, cause I'm experienced and trained, and **** doesn't happen, i probably won't hurt anyone.

[Zalos Taltos]

Should a weapon be pulled if it causes an injury to a nonstandard hit location (head, eyes, ect)?

In my opinion, I think we should pull the fighter rather than the weapon in these situations, black eyes and the like may happen independent of the safety of the weapon (not counting javs/arrows/rocks) .

[Stellaria]

Varadin, I consider "too soft, feel core" to be "too hard". I also think that too stiff of foam can be too hard - that's part of why we switched up the foam we use on our heavy blues. The blue foam sucks to get hit with in that particular weapon, even though it usually passes.

I still maintain that the hit that I took to my hand would have snapped that bone no matter what, just because of the way the shot landed and the force that it was thrown with. And the fact that I have teeny tiny bones.
So, I guess I am answering Olaf's question with a "yes".

[Quorren]

Should a weapon be pulled if it causes an injury to a nonstandard hit location (head, eyes, ect)?

In my opinion, I think we should pull the fighter rather than the weapon in these situations, black eyes and the like may happen independent of the safety of the weapon (not counting javs/arrows/rocks) .

Unless it seems intentional or it becomes prolific, I think pulling a fighter is too drastic for delivering a head shot. They happen.

[Hollo]

Overall, if a weapon causes INJURIES, it should not be considered safe.

Anything that takes time to heal, or is perhaps permanent damage, is an injury.

However, PAIN is not to be considered an injury.  More than likely, if you get hit directly, it's going to sting and maybe ache a bit after.  This isn't in any way permanent, and it's the price to pay (besides gear and event fees.  ) for participating in a full-contact sport. 

If something happens that IS an injury, step back and evaluate what caused it to happen so you can ensure it doesn't get repeated.

Examples: 
               -Lack of courtesy padding
               -Carelessness while fighting
               -Rule not being followed
               -Etc..

[Orrin None-son]

I realy do not like the race to the bottom, that a lot of "quality foamsmiths" are on these days, sacrificing safety for lighter gear.

[Arrakis]

I realy do not like the race to the bottom, that a lot of "quality foamsmiths" are on these days, sacrificing safety for lighter gear.

The problem with this post is that it's excessively simple to make a durable 10 ounce 30" sword safely from common materials for <$10/sword. 

[Zalos Taltos]

Should a weapon be pulled if it causes an injury to a nonstandard hit location (head, eyes, ect)?

In my opinion, I think we should pull the fighter rather than the weapon in these situations, black eyes and the like may happen independent of the safety of the weapon (not counting javs/arrows/rocks) .

Unless it seems intentional or it becomes prolific, I think pulling a fighter is too drastic for delivering a head shot. They happen.

True, headshots happen, injuries are not suppose to happen. I think if you cause an injury you should take a break from the field, and at least make sure the person you hurt is alright.

[Quorren]

Should a weapon be pulled if it causes an injury to a nonstandard hit location (head, eyes, ect)?

In my opinion, I think we should pull the fighter rather than the weapon in these situations, black eyes and the like may happen independent of the safety of the weapon (not counting javs/arrows/rocks) .

Unless it seems intentional or it becomes prolific, I think pulling a fighter is too drastic for delivering a head shot. They happen.

True, headshots happen, injuries are not suppose to happen. I think if you cause an injury you should take a break from the field, and at least make sure the person you hurt is alright.

Yeah, I would do the same.

[Rune]

I'm a little torn by this.  The rules are the rules, but there is no way that a weapon that isnt a giant couch on a stick is going to be made to be safe for any fighters swinging at any caliber.  I've been told that I can swing hard, but I rarely ever give more then 50% power because I dont want to chance it.  I know my weapons, and I know the potential of the foam they are made of.  Ultimately i think it comes down to how knowledgeable the fighter is with their gear.  Take harvest feast or war, and any other event that I have been allowed to test red/polearm weapons for example. When I take the field after that, I know that those weapons will be safe.  I am quite certain that I could fail any non couch on a standard light, medium, hard back test. How do we as a whole bring together all the different ideas and thought paths with weapons checking to make a happy safe medium other then what we already have in place now?   

I think it is less of a lax in weapons checking, and more of a norm of harder weapons passing check, and a persons bias toward what they feel is "safe" when checking a weapon.  There just isnt a way to 100% clarify what the min/max force is.

[PhotoJoe]

If a car can cause an injury is it safe?

If a stove can cause an injury is it safe?

If a knife can cause an injury is it safe?

If a hammer can cause an injury is it safe?

If a piece of solid furniture, in a dark home, populated with folks wearing no shoes, can cause an injury is it safe?

[Syr Olaf]

Photo Joe you forgot how the tint of the sunglasses protect your eyes from injury better then the clear safety glasses do.

Back on topic:

When you talk about weapons safety. Varadin is right that all safe weapons hurt to some degree. That is not the sign that a weapon is unsafe but leaving a bruise, break a bone, or knock out teeth when being struck with the striking surface . This has become more and more predominant every year. Anyone who thinks this is acceptable you will be pushing smaller people out of this game and many more injuries will become the norm.

If a lighter hitting fighter has a couple of ed hell blues that passed weapons check. It was not tested to be safe in any one hands. A heavy hitter asks to borrow one of the blues. Then that heavy hitter uses for 30 min. and leaves bruises and complaints from many people on the field. The herald watches and see that he is using it properly.  The weapons checker checks the weapon not testing to be safe in any one hands. The weapons is deemed safe but the fighter is removed for hitting to hard (not improperly). The fighter is accused instead of the  unsafe weapon. Is this fair? This is why it is important check weapons to be safe in any one hands.

[Oisín Leathshúileach]

I realy do not like the race to the bottom, that a lot of "quality foamsmiths" are on these days, sacrificing safety for lighter gear.

The problem with this post is that it's excessively simple to make a durable 10 ounce 30" pixie stick safely from common materials for <$10/sword.

FTFY. 

[Odran]

I vaguely remember back reading posts on weapon construction back in 2005/6 in which use of open cell foam (with closed cell) was the norm for red striking surfaces. I remember someone even suggesting to use open cell foam in the construction of a min red.

[Orrin None-son]

I realy do not like the race to the bottom, that a lot of "quality foamsmiths" are on these days, sacrificing safety for lighter gear.

The problem with this post is that it's excessively simple to make a durable 10 ounce 30" sword safely from common materials for <$10/sword. 

Notice I did not say all min weapons were made that way. Do not put words in my mouth.

[Askarus Space Beard]

I got a good example!

Sparta bought 10 swords from best dag stuff a while ago, built them correctly and all that.

We used them for about a month, where in several people got giant welts on their limbs, people broke their hands trying to block and someone got their knee taken out.

Point is, these swords seemed safe for people in this game that aren't going full tilt like we do. In our hands they become dangerous.

PS - wasn't trying to bash bestdagstuff.com - they're great swords, the problem was our fault.

[Syr Olaf]

When I started most people were not fighting pillow swords. Mostly marine or the first camping mats ( not blue foam) with pipe insulation. Pvc pipe cores. They were not pillows! The rule was also hit as hard as possible. We had less problems then now. The weapons were stiff but. Soft enough to not injure  someone with a swing full tilt

[Judge Dredd]

With all the advances in foam tech and all the people fighting with foam, I am unwilling to admit defeat and start telling people to swing softer. It simply does not fit the Game of Dag to do so, it fits quite a few other games, but this in not them. One of the major draws of Dag is the intensity of our combat. Start checking weapons better and start constructing them better is the answer, not swing softer.

[Tari]

I’m not sure how I feel about this. Weapons get picked up all the time on the field; how can you ensure that one weapon is safe for a small person like me and a bigger, stronger person like Rune or Varadin?

Do you implement different rules for guys like them? Do you tell them they can’t swing as hard or they’ll be pulled from the field? I don’t think those are possible solutions, because I can’t see anyone walking on the field with the intension of hurting someone else.

A properly constructed safe sword will still bruise someone like me, but that doesn’t mean that it’s not safe.

[Rap the Space Drunk]

Photo Joe you forgot how the tint of the sunglasses protect your eyes from injury better then the clear safety glasses do.

Nice cut up Olaf

We used them for about a month, where in several people got giant welts on their limbs, people broke their hands trying to block and someone got their knee taken out.

This is A- why Sparta is awesome, and B- kinda my point. Askarus' non chalant way of mentioning these injuries.

I step on to the field with the knowledge of, I may get injured. This is regrettable, and hopefully avoidable, but just part of the game. I've played rugby and football for years, maybe that has helped raise me in this mindset. **** happens, that's part of this sport. Granted, weapons check needs to do everything in it's power to keep everyone safe, and weapon tech should keep in mind the potential of both the user, and who may grab that weapon. Really though, it just boils down to grit your teeth and take your lumps.

Now to add some personal relevance, so this isn't just a "Rap is bat**** insane, don't listen to him!" post. I'm a semi professional cellist, I gig around in quartets and orchestras and such. I take a bad hand shot... I'm donesies. Had to back out of a wedding gig once and find a replacement because of a thumb injury last Harvest Feast from Grik. The injury cost me a couple hundred dollars, not to mention having a bum thumb for a few months.  It still stiffens up on me some days.

That's the game though. Roll with the hand shots.

[Squire Ducky McFeelgood]

When I started most people were not fighting pillow swords. Mostly marine or the first camping mats ( not blue foam) with pipe insulation. Pvc pipe cores. They were not pillows! The rule was also hit as hard as possible. We had less problems then now. The weapons were stiff but. Soft enough to not injure  someone with a swing full tilt

Yes, back when you started you did have alot few injuries. Goes along with alot fewer people and what was probably a more unified standard for construction and checking.

[Judge Dredd]

Gonna illustrate a point here from today's fighting:

I hit Lock in the face with a full strength shot with my heavy blue. He needed to sit down for a minute but there was no mark or injury. He was back in the fighting shortly after.

I hit Daz in the knee with my lightsaber blue (12oz voldemort sword fry on kitespar) and he told me that he thinks the sword should fail. I handed him the sword immediately and he gave me a look (like, don't give me that, I know it passes). He tested it and said 2 interesting things. One implied that the sword was on its way to failing (which it is not), the other implied that that sword should not pass if I am going to use it (borderline correct).

So what we know is, that if you are going to hit hard, take your weapons tech up to a level that matches your ability. And don't expect things to be "safe" just cause they are light. And at this point, if you hit hard, don't borrow other peoples gear unless you plan to take a bunch off your swing.

I find it disturbing that our weapons checkers take into account whose weapon they are checking when pass/failing weapons. I hate feeling that if I pick up someone else's weapon off the field, I could hurt someone.

In closing, if you cant make a weapon at min specs that is safe for me to hit you with full force, add some friggen foam till it's safe!

[Gaul]

I like this thread.  However, it's got a hell of a lot of pointing out the problem and only a shred of solution.  Now what, exactly, do you think the padding standards should be for, say, a blue on 1/2" square fiberglass or 3/4" PVC, or a mini-red on bandshoppe pole?

[Alric]

Good enough that, when you hit someone with a hard swing (when I check weapons, this means putting all my hips into it, and perhaps also a small step), it doesn't injure the weapon checker's back. If we had that across the board (and we don't - I've seen weapon checks where the hardest hit was somewhere between a light and a medium), a lot of these too-hard weapons would be filtered out.

For 1/2" pvc blues, this typically just takes 3 layers of blue foam. For min-reds with stiff cores, 3/4" of marine foam on the edge of the blade usually does it.

[Judge Dredd]

I like this thread.  However, it's got a hell of a lot of pointing out the problem and only a shred of solution.  Now what, exactly, do you think the padding standards should be for, say, a blue on 1/2" square fiberglass or 3/4" PVC, or a mini-red on bandshoppe pole?

Takes some research but good tutorials on weapons making are out there. If you are working with fiberglass cores, listen to Stell and Jari. The problem arises when people talk in absolutes. A properly made (broken in) weapon using Walmart blue (or voldemort sword fry) can be as safe as minicell, EVA, and marine foam. Just realize that weapons break down so "it passed last battle" is never a reason to bitch out a weapons checker.

[Judge Dredd]

Hey Stell!
Post a solution!!!

[Lady Krystal]

Good enough that, when you hit someone with a hard swing (when I check weapons, this means putting all my hips into it, and perhaps also a small step), it doesn't injure the weapon checker's back. If we had that across the board (and we don't - I've seen weapon checks where the hardest hit was somewhere between a light and a medium), a lot of these too-hard weapons would be filtered out.

For 1/2" pvc blues, this typically just takes 3 layers of blue foam. For min-reds with stiff cores, 3/4" of marine foam on the edge of the blade usually does it.

See... now, this is where I've had problems in the past. When I check reds, I do it like you do. I throw a SHOT... and I've echoed the walls of the barn we were checking in And most weapons came out just fine. The few that do fail, I've heard complaints of them not being checked "as intended". Which, again, I think stems from not having a solid "this is how you check a weapon" explanation out there.

Case in point, I've heard it established that say... for a blue/green, you don't go for the crazy full-strength double-green because that's not how the weapon is intended to be used (for obvious reasons) - and it's accepted as a legit.  Then, if we don't do these and check weapons outside their intended usage.. then are we being too lax? At what point do we determine the difference?

[Orrin None-son]

I test everything at the top of my power arc.

Intended use, and hat happens on accident are two different things.

We need to test for what WILL happen, not what was meant to happen.

[Orrin None-son]

Oh, and Krystal, I want you weapons checking again. I liked your checks....

[Kachina]

So what we know is, that if you are going to hit hard, take your weapons tech up to a level that matches your ability. And don't expect things to be "safe" just cause they are light. And at this point, if you hit hard, don't borrow other peoples gear unless you plan to take a bunch off your swing.

I find it disturbing that our weapons checkers take into account whose weapon they are checking when pass/failing weapons. I hate feeling that if I pick up someone else's weapon off the field, I could hurt someone.

In closing, if you cant make a weapon at min specs that is safe for me to hit you with full force, add some friggen foam till it's safe!

Meh, therin lies the problem....

I've designed weapons that are pretty cushy, I hit well but I'm certainly not one of those guys who the weapons checkers go "if he was wielding it it'd fail" - other than a reputation for making people groan with spear thrusts that's about as far as I go, which is fine, I haven't fought a line much in the past three years...

Subsequently I make better, safer weapons and they call light - usually this isn't much of a problem as there is or was a distinct difference in green thrusts to a blue hit, typically the second hit gave them the clue that they should've took the first one and it works itself out, however after switching out to all closed cell on my stabbing, it's hard to make a hard shot seem like anything but medium, and that's starting to irk me....

I'm sure you're all aware of the phrase cheater beaters, I have not nor will ever make one, but at the same time I've met the folks where I hit them with a safer weapon and they blow it off because they're used to the minimum weapons... I guess I'm just trying to say I feel there's a bit of a disconnect there, same as hit hard take light (which has many different interpretations)

[Kachina]

BH made me think of something else... I suppose it's a different attitude.
 
While we DO make a substantial effort for safety freak accidents do happen, I've seen broken arms, wrists, fingers, noses, concussions- arrow fletchings across the eye, other injuries that would be more sport related (twisted ankles, rotator cuffs, knees)

FWIW pad the weapon not the player is great until the weapon fails is all I'm saying, much less the fighter behind the weapon, if BH knows he can jack someone up with someone else's weapon and decides not to pick it up he's much more the fighter I'd want on the field than the newbie who does a full force red swing to the lower back of an unaware opponent.

So I suppose what I'm saying is even if the weapon is safe they still have the potential to cause injury, what is important is the people wielding them strive to be as safe as possible on the field.

[Alric]

Interesting... I've never met an all-closed cell stabbing tip that didn't hit HARD on anything but a light shot.

[Syr Olaf]

the point is bh should be able to fight with any weapon that passes check for safety.  Checkers do not know whose sword it is unless has name all over. How do they know who is going to borrow it. Should we make a rule that only the owner of the weapon can use it? How are we going to inforce that? This. Idea will cause more injuries!!!

Do you know how many new people that are a hard hitter are pushed out of the game because they are told they hit too hard with weapons that pass check in lighter hitting chapter? we will never know? My change of the judging hit rule from noticable to suffecient is the start to fix these injuries and weapons checking.

[Soo Ma Tai]

I play primarily a different game, where the focus is even more on combat than here and the Voldemort weapons are the standard. We hit hard, perhaps harder in general than Dag, but at least equally in general. We have no problems with injuries from those weapons, as long as they are checked properly before they hit the field.

Also, I can make min weight weapons totally safe out of available materials. It's not a stretch in the least.