Weapon Standards: Reopened for standards discussion

"Your rules are bad and you should feel bad!"
Plot
Posts: 737
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 12:40 am

Weapon Standards: Reopened for standards discussion

Post by Plot » Sat Jan 30, 2016 12:15 am

Are the ones we have enough?

Do we need to better enforce them or better explain them or both?

What do you think about them?

Additionally, should boffers which portray post apocalyptic weaponry deal an additional point of damage?
With attention to representation as opposed to materials constructed. So that we're rewarding players for their creativity as opposed to an individuals personal income. For Example, a gaffers tape and foam chain saw dealing 2+1 damage vs a custom latex sword dealing 2 base damage.

This topic Closes on February 5th at 2300 of 2016

User avatar
Jay Belarpin
Posts: 512
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2016 10:45 pm

Re: Weapon Standards

Post by Jay Belarpin » Sat Jan 30, 2016 12:31 am

When I suggested this I completely meant both the explanation and the enforcement of boffer construction rules. It isn't that we don't have standards, its that we don't have them written and easily available. Most games list their requirements in a pretty solid detail and I feel we should be doing the same.

On the enforcement end, both the game kit and the players often use weapons that fail these standards which means we should either change our standards or start enforcing them. The most obvious example is the claw boffers, both in terms of build legality (kit's are almost all too long according to rulebook) and safety (core rule).

I don't hate the idea of rewarding players who bring in awesome looking boffers but I'm wary about implementation. I don't feel people should be left out based on lack of capacity.
As all of this happened, Bill poured a drink.

Plot
Posts: 737
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 12:40 am

Re: Kits Claws

Post by Plot » Sat Jan 30, 2016 12:58 am

Please note, length applies to player characters. Though I have been working on making replacements. ^_^

User avatar
Jay Belarpin
Posts: 512
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2016 10:45 pm

Re: Weapon Standards

Post by Jay Belarpin » Sat Jan 30, 2016 1:09 am

Our game loans out claws to PCs a lot. So unless we want to maintain a separate stock for that purpose it would probably be wise to make them all PC legal.
As all of this happened, Bill poured a drink.

User avatar
Ander
Posts: 752
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2016 9:09 pm

Re: Weapon Standards

Post by Ander » Sat Jan 30, 2016 2:18 am

I would certainly like to see the weapon standards clearly laid out somewhere. I've had a few ideas for weapons which have not come to fruition partly because of the lack of this information (and, admittedly, my own laziness/forgetfulness in seeking out the information). I would be happy to put together a wiki page for it if someone can point me in the right direction.

As far as the bonus for post-apoc appropriate weaponry, I'm in favor of the concept if perhaps not the implementation. In your given example this represents a 50% bonus to damage which seems excessive. However, it should be said that I'm not that familiar with melee combat, are there any alternative bonuses we can offer aside from the simple damage buff?

User avatar
jazzman831
Posts: 557
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 8:56 pm

Re: Weapon Standards

Post by jazzman831 » Sat Jan 30, 2016 10:04 am

Other than (1) length (2) red = claws, and (3) a general "they have to be safe", I'm having trouble finding any weapon "standards", so I think we need to make them more specific and more visible. If they are written and specific, it should help the situation which probably sparked this discussion: my boffer weapon that was approved at the first game and caused a welt the second game. I basically took a stab at making a weapon and it seemed safe enough to me, but it was just a glorified guess.

As for bonuses for "post-apoc appropriate", I'd be wary of that. After all, with so many different sources of apocalyptic lore, what is post-apocalyptic appropriate? Take the katana. One character has one in The Walking Dead, it's a featured weapon in Into The Badlands, and it would be completely out of place in Road Warrior. Plus it increases the chance of giving in-game bonuses for out-of-game skill (and in some cases, expense). My boffer is thin with silver duct tape and a cord-wrapped handle, so it's a katana, which is genre appropriate, and gets a bonus (for example). Someone else might make something that looks like it's made out of a pool noodle and black duct tape, so it's a generic sword and doesn't get a bonus.
-Jebediah the Proud

Plot
Posts: 737
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 12:40 am

Results

Post by Plot » Fri Feb 05, 2016 12:15 am

Our weapon standards will be better explained and spelled out. In addition we'll add them to our Wiki and increase their presence in the rulebook.

Further, this topic is being reopened for players to chime in on their position regarding safe construction standards.

IE, minimum padding for striking surfaces vs courtesy padding for non striking surfaces. Core materials, foam types, tape or soft cloth or both? Etc

User avatar
Jay Belarpin
Posts: 512
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2016 10:45 pm

Re: Weapon Standards: Reopened for standards discussion

Post by Jay Belarpin » Tue Feb 09, 2016 3:17 pm

My go-to safety things:
-2 inches open cell foam on all stabbing tips/pommels. This is included in weapons length.
-No uncovered foam, must be covered in latex, plastidip, or duct tape. (Please remember to seal all latex/plastidip weapons)
-Foam must not move around core.
-Core must not be felt though squeezing of the weapon's striking surfaces.
-Courtesy padding must cover all non-stiking areas besides grip area. (in the case of pole-arms and staves, the grip area may be no longer than 1 ft)
As all of this happened, Bill poured a drink.

User avatar
Swordguy
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:16 am

Re: Weapon Standards: Reopened for standards discussion

Post by Swordguy » Tue Feb 09, 2016 6:28 pm

Tagging this real quick (I'll come back to it later), but you guys really, REALLY want to have something in the rules limiting the manufacture of ultralight weapons (kite spar core, etc) if you're serious about limiting to 1 swing/sec/weapon. ULs have a tendency to speed up melee combat something fierce.
Mission, Method, Morals...all negotiable.

User avatar
Jay Belarpin
Posts: 512
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2016 10:45 pm

Re: Weapon Standards: Reopened for standards discussion

Post by Jay Belarpin » Thu Feb 11, 2016 4:07 am

I was just reminded about Nerf guns. Since they can be so heavily modified and improved upon I suggest we say "Must use stock spring."

It is quite possible to modify a lot of nerf guns to well above the .59 Joules that we limit our airsoft guns to. It is a lot easier to do so than with airsoft guns as well. Thanks to kits for spring replacement being readily available online and tutorials on youtube.
As all of this happened, Bill poured a drink.

Locked