BIONICLE G1 Canon Contests Discussion & Questions

I am little bit conflicted. I am a great fan of the design but as you said it has not been said during the story. It could be Lariska always had it but didn’t use?

Mata Nui had a thornax launcher in his set and he never used it. Is the Thornax launcher non canon because mata nui did not use it in story?

If official set can have a non canon extra weapon then lariska can have a minor rhotuka launcher? (although minor part is debatable)

Another argument is that Greg can include it to the story. Miserix was not a lizard or liked lizards before the creator of Miserix made him a lizard and it won the competition.

In the end the Artwork is canon not the moc. Artwork could be prevented to show Lariska shooting rhotukas. But to those who build the model it is nice little bonus.

4 Likes

The thing about your comparison is that the sets are “most canon” - if the Mata Nui set wielded a Thornax launcher, then it is canon that he wielded it for some length of time, and any fan story that gives him that weapon as part of his arsenal would be fully canon-compliant. That situation specifically is a tricky one but I believe that’s the full implication there.

2 Likes

Tarkur does rise an important point. I too think Tuyet could not have an axe, or small extra dagger for that matter or a zamor launcher. But I would not be against if someone included a cape for Empress Tuyet.

edit: or maybe i would allow a small dagger? i do allow the rhotuka spinner for Lariska. If tuyets sword split into two smaller ones like Lhikans shield I would support that as well.

I also support the idea that TYQ toa weapons could have double functions. Toa nuvas weapons became fins,lavaboard,wings,skiis, a ball and chainsaw rollerskates. I would like to see mocs whose weapons also transformed.

3 Likes

Unless the art depicts the weapon in both forms (somehow), a transforming weapon cannot be canonized.

1 Like

Looks nice, but I’m confused on how the barbs are attached. Does that work in real life?

2 Likes

So basically how it works is the Barbs each slot into the reversed side of a stud with a hole in it. The stud part then is connected to the 7L Liftarm. This allows for the Barbs to stay in place better than using a 1/2 pin and allows for a thinner build. I just with the 3L Liftarm was a 3 pinhole version so the bohrok teeth could be replaced with a 1x1 slope.

As far as I can tell from Homer Doo, it should stay connected quite well.


His head is held on by the same connection.

10 Likes

The Skull Sorcerer’s Dragon set also uses the same connection for its claws, for an official example.

3 Likes

I actually didn’t know that, so there we go. Official Lego technique.

3 Likes

Hmoer doo

4 Likes

I actually really like how the barbs here don’t cover the whole blade, so she can use it like a broadsword is supposed to be used, or she can alternatively RUN THROUGH a hapless target hilt-deep, then pull it out like an epic anime villain for MAXIMUM DAMAGE.

1 Like

As far as the Rhotuka launcher is concerned, I get what people are saying. I think it’s worth considering a few different angles.

1: Could it not just be used as a piece, and not intend to fire Rhotuka?
2: Could it not exist on the model, and not necessarily intend to be a Rhotuka launcher?
3: Is it not unreasonable to believe it’s possible that a Dark Hunter, an assassin which may potentially use many different tools, might have an additional utility in a completely robotic arm?

All of these things considered, I think it’d be fair to say we wouldn’t disallow the launcher, but would almost certainly disallow a Rhotuka spinner being used in the traditional sense. Because the inclusion/exclusion of the launcher allows for the potential while avoiding a backdoor weapon canonization through the contest that people are worried about. That way, it can be inquired with Greg at a later time.

To clarify, that is not an end-all, be-all declaration. Just the current perspective and thoughts.

I hope you understand why this phrasing is wildly misleading at best.

These three are all really good examples of the many kinds of designs that would be entirely allowed, even into the art.

19 Likes

My First BB is allowed!? YEAH! :heart_eyes: :heart_eyes: :revolving_hearts: :revolving_hearts:

11 Likes

There really do be backwards facing spikes on that sword

3 Likes

latest one’s my favorite personally

5 Likes

I asked many people in some place, and FIRST and THIRD is popular.
I think Second’s reason is too similar to Lhikan’s sword, but it was not bad sword! :stuck_out_tongue:

Now I can go to contest with no worry! :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:
(Even if this BB has be arranged in Art, there are left a fact of “this sword has a backward barb”, and it means this MOC will not break the canon mention!)

10 Likes

I quite like the second one, but the first one really scratches an itch with the great use of the Thornax launcher pieces.

6 Likes

I like the first one best. It is simple and uses classic pieces from gen 1.

Second doesn’t look barbed.

Third one is ok but does not have the g1 wibe

3 Likes

I love the 3rd one but it looks finicky to actually build.

3 Likes

As cool as the thornax sword design is, it looks like it’s stressing the pieces a bit. The launcher fingers are being extended half a bushing apart each from where they’re supposed to rest. There are lots of ways you could do barbs. Spamming minifig hands on a rigid hose, spamming posing stands on a half-liftarm or tile, spamming pirate epaulettes on a technic axle and then trapping them, etc.

3 Likes

Now we can see “no other way” is not correct, but this is the reason.
Thornax launcher is very soft and tough, because they had be made so! :stuck_out_tongue:

10 Likes