Board Thread:Off Topic/@comment-27447621-20180223225208/@comment-3391158-20180402071524

Phantomlink959 wrote: RyanTheScourgeOfTheStorm25 wrote: Malcolm Neill wrote:   Question - Do you think it needs an Inactive Form for Storage and portability

Question 2 - Do you think the name Flaxen Thistle is better than Gunnabatan? 1:Yeah, scottish weaponry in Ye Olde days was REALLY heavy, i know this because i'm taking history in school

2:A lot better. Not much heavier than any other european culture, to my knowledge at least. People often overestimate the actual mass of historical weapon because they LOOK big.

However, weight is not the primary factor in determining if a weapon needs an inactive form; it's bulk. A light but bulky weapon will require an alternative form when not in use while a heavy but compact one will not.

In this case, given it's a fairly long polearm, the answer is yes it does need a storage/inactive form. Which is easy to do as long as the handle is telescoped.

Also fairly decent weapon Bajaras