denerfing axes

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Gudiomen

So, in this day and age, of LT and it's companions... would the +1 to damage still be a good idea to make axes more attractive? Alternatively, would axes ignoring the "edge protection" optional rule be a way to achieve this? Would both options be overkill?

How do we pimp axes so they become more attractive options for adventurers?

Edit: let's avoid FLAT OUT cinematic options, like the "dwarven" DF quality modifier...
Edit: correcting myself, Kromm suggested +1 to all two-handed axe/mac weapons (so, not 1-handed axes, but yes for 2-handed maces)

If you read Low Tech, it already implements +1 damage for Two-Handed Axe/Mace weapons (and gives the Axe separate stats for two-handed use). I would not increase damage further without fixing swung damage and the bloated armour penetration of muscle-powered weapons.

Right now axes usually get: +1 swung damage; unbalanced; 10% cost; can hook

whereas swords get +0 swung damage; balanced; 100% cost; can thrust

The problem with axes against armour is that I don't know of any good data. We are down to trained intuition working on anecdotes and vaguely related experiments. Its probably best not to appeal to realism to change things until you are really sure that the change would be more realistic.

[Polydamas]

One more thought: GURPS weapon axes are versatile tools which can be used against wood, flesh, or armour (not all axes used in war fit this description, but many do). Outdoor adventurers will need a few axes per group: saving a few pounds by carrying a Small Axe (3 lbs) instead of a hatchet plus a broadsword (5 lbs) isn't a negligible advantage. This is one reason that swords fell out of fashion in the borderlands of 18th century North America.

[Gudiomen]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

If you read Low Tech, it already implements +1 damage for Two-Handed Axe/Mace weapons (and gives the Axe separate stats for two-handed use). I would not increase damage further without fixing swung damage and the bloated armour penetration of muscle-powered weapons.

Originally Posted by Bruno

Low Tech does implement the increase in the damage of basic set two-handed axe/mace weapons by +1 right across the board.

Heh, that's what I get for never looking at Basic's weapon tables again since LT came out. So the +1 issue is done, that's one thing done.

Originally Posted by cybersamurai

In my current campaign, I am using the "edge protection" rules from low tech. However, I only apply it to balanced cutting weapons such as swords--not to axes. (...) So far this house rule has provided a good game play balance in my campaign. Just my two cents

That's useful feedback, anybody else try it and found it to be ok?

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

For those who don't want to go that far, perhaps axes would only face 1/2 of the Edge Protection? So they'd have to exceed 150% of the target's DR, rather than 200%, to gain the cutting modifier. This may be too complicated for some though...

Yeah, it sounds more realistic, even if it's better than a light blade, cutting weapons should still not be as good as impaling ones at penetrating armor. But, as you say, it's more math than I think my players would be comfortable with. It gives you fractions you have to round, and remember which way to round.
Plus, I would like to preserve the possibility of mail occasionally stopping axes, even if it breaks your ribs....

I'd really like to hear more from people that treat unbalanced cutting blades differently than balanced ones with regards to edge protection...

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Gudiomen

I'd really like to hear more from people that treat unbalanced cutting blades differently than balanced ones with regards to edge protection...

Giving balanced cutting and crushing weapons AD(0.5) and using the Edge Protection rules for unbalanced ones works fine for me. Because I'm the sort of person who likes to avoid sharp breakpoints, I also have an intermediate category of heavy weapons that are not quite unbalanced (hatchets, cleavers, falchions, knobbed clubs, bastard swords, greatswords) that use a modified version of the Edge Protection rules, with DR multiplied by x1.5, but the cutting modifier (if any) not kicking in unless DRx2 is penetrated.

This means that longswords and balanced single-handed blades are used to slash against unarmoured limbs and faces, not against mail or plate. Very strong warriors, like Sir Michael in my fantasy campaign, will slash through anything with his magical AD(3) claymore regardless, but if he's faced with Hardened magical armour, he'll use a hammer he carries for such occasions.

Axes are perfectly viable weapons. A Fine (Materials and Balanced) one only costs are much as regular sword and it will be much more effective against mailed foes than a sword. A ST 12 man will do an average of 2 points of damage thrusting through mail with his sword (no damage on a slash unless he rolls a critical hit). With the axe, he does 5 5/6 on average and has a better chance of hitting.

[Kuroshima]

In DF, however, axes are god weapons, and the only difference is the dwarven modifier, that for a mere +4 CF (and it's not much, given that axes are cheap) removed the U-parry.

[Qvintus]

If you make defensive attacks with an axe you can choose not to unready it, so if you are using a fine axe you can choose to do the same damage as you would do with a good longsword and not getting it unready. And thinking of cost its a lot cheaper and if we are using the options form low tech you can put a spike on the back of the axe and you do have a weapon thats at lest as good as the sword if not better