- Siegfried is 100% correct.
>This is even more ridiculous when it comes to crossbows since there is no
> > http://www.pennsicwar.org/penn34/MARTIAL/archery.html
> > The person using the equipment must be present when that equipment is
> being inspected, so that it can be determined that the archer is safe with it.
> > Given an inspection failure, you can used borrowed equipment, but bear
> in mind that that, too, must be inspected in your presence
draw length issue. If a person is too weak to span my crossbow, then they
won't be able to shoot it, but this can't be determined at the inspection
table since we are not required to span crossbows during inspection for
good reason. So this puts us in the position of having to go back to the
inspection table every time someone wants to try out my crossbow to ask
permission. "Can I please let Li Kung Lo try my crossbow?"
>This, I do not believe, has been the case in the past. For this meansIn the past I simply carried a half dozen loaner bows with me when I went
>that, for example, if there is equipment failure and you lose the use
>of your bow, and need to borrow one, that said borrowed one, even if
>it's already been inspected, now needs reinspected, specific to the
>Traditionally bow inspections were independant of the archer. Will
>we be putting the archer's medallion number on the sticker this year
>to ensure that only that archer can use that bow without a
up to the range for the first time. Then when I'd bring someone to the
range who had never shot before I'd let them try out a few bows until they
found one they could draw comfortably and shoot comfortably. Last year I
paid 9 mercenary archers to shoot for me for populace points. Several of
them had never touched a bow before and didn't know what they could
handle. For this reason I have bows from 25# to 45# on hand. By the rule
as written we'd have to head back to the inspection table several times.
>Also, while the 'one bow one archer' rule has been in place forContrary to common opinion, the one bow rule was never intended to apply to
>competition ... it has not been in place for practice/novelty
anything but the advancing man shoot. Some stupid piece of shit who didn't
know what he (or she) was doing, changed the wording of the rule sometime
in the past so that it no longer made sense. So this should not even be an
issue. I don't believe that the inspection should concern itself with
anything but the condition of the equipment at the time at which it is
first brought to the range. It's up to the line marshals and the archers
themselves to keep an eye on the performance of the system
(archer+bow+arrows) on the line over time.
>Jim Koch (Gladius The Alchemist)