Statues.

[E of Alshire]

Just a question -

Is there any reason why one wouldn't use real armor and weapons on a statue, rather than carving them on?

thanks
Ethan

[smcginnis]

Hmm, besides rust? I don't think so. But if you hadn't realized about rust, it would certainly be an issue, especially if the whole thing wasn't covered. For instance, if the statue was only wearing a cuirass and helmet, the rust would run down on to the legs.

~smcginnis

[Damien]

Plenty of reasons.

Real items will rust.
Real items simply don't last as long as carved stone.
You wanna try to strap armour onto a statue? Not as easy as it sounds.
Weapons are expensive.
Armour is even more expensive.

[TwoTonic Knight]

Just a question -

Is there any reason why one wouldn't use real armor and weapons on a statue, rather than carving them on?

thanks
Ethan

Real armor will get stolen (looted). Artists are cheaper than armorers. Stone doesn't rust (no, let's not split hairs, thank you).

[JoshWedin]

The statues would look like mannequins displaying armor.

Weapons are expensive.
Armour is even more expensive.

Artists are cheaper than armorers.

I think price is a big part. An artist would still have to carve the body accurately in order for the statue to wear armor. So it would actually cost more for a statue to wear armor. Also I am sure it is easier to carve accurate armor than an accurate torso. The looting and rust are good reasons too.

Josh

[Remyth]

Yes,
There are a few major reasons,
1, The armor and weapons would rust
2, A full suit of armor was worth about $100,000 in todays U.S. currency
3, weapons were expensive
4, why waste all of that metal on armor and weapons that arent even going to be used. As for using material other than metal or rock, it was way too expensive to get.
Thanks, Thomas

[zac_schmitt]

4, why waste all of that metal on armor and weapons that arent even going to be used. As for using material other than metal or rock, it was way too expensive to get.

to show off one's wealth?

in the real world, that would be extremely silly, but in a fantasy setting works fine (in one of my favorite fantasy series there is a family whose ancestors always get a real sword placed on the lap of the statue in front of their tombs so that their ghosts can rest more easily)

[Legendary_Corsair]

I think about rust and someone could pick the stone off and grab the weapons.but besides a few other things I think it would be fine.

[stuifzand]

I think about rust and someone could pick the stone off and grab the weapons.but besides a few other things I think it would be fine.

could you please check the dates of the last post in topics you're posting in? It's getting annoying to read topic kicks from over a year old topics

[kelderic]

I think about rust and someone could pick the stone off and grab the weapons.but besides a few other things I think it would be fine.

could you please check the dates of the last post in topics you're posting in? It's getting annoying to read topic kicks from over a year old topics

I second that. I saw April, but then saw 2006. There are plenty of live topics to post on.

Kelderic

[RichardAM]

Just a question -

Is there any reason why one wouldn't use real armor and weapons on a statue, rather than carving them on?

The armour would rust as others have noted, and depending on what kind of stone your statue was made from, the stone itself would turn orange from the rust- it would work it's way into the stonework.

Also, because there's no real talent in a statue without armour- you could just create an all manner of cylindrical shapes and they would just be covered in real-life objects. It would be cheating.