D&D 5E No love for the hand axe?

[Sword of Spirit]

A handaxe actually borders on unbalanced. It is a simple weapon that is at least as effective as the martial shortsword and scimitar.

You do the same damage as those weapons, you can dual-wield it, and you can throw it. So basically, if you go Strength-based two-weapon fighting you are getting the ability to throw your weapon, making it superior to Dex-based finesse two weapon fighting.

Statistically, it ought to be a martial weapon.

Sure, eventually you'll do less damage than you would with a greatsword if you are getting multiple attacks, but again, the benefit you are gaining in trade off is that it can be thrown.

Even if you choose to use just one of them instead of a d8 weapon...thrown!

It's a perfectly balanced martial weapon that is listed as a simple weapon. As long as you plan to take advantage of the thrown property at least occasionally, you aren't getting gimped by using a handaxe.

 

[LapBandit]

I am a big fan of cool magic abilities on suboptimal weapons. I have had vorpal (heart piercers) spears, hand axes of speed (extra attack as a bonus), defender whips (free parry feat ability), tridents of the elements (3d4 elemental damage each d4 different) and a constricting net ( d8 damage to those caught in it). If a weapon is suboptimal give it a cool special ability through magic or feats.

This is exactly what I do.

Trident of Tangling = +1, advantage on Disarm.

Daggers of Wounding and Vampirism too.

Handaxe +1 of Return.

 

[Shiroiken]

A handaxe actually borders on unbalanced. It is a simple weapon that is at least as effective as the martial shortsword and scimitar.

You do the same damage as those weapons, you can dual-wield it, and you can throw it. So basically, if you go Strength-based two-weapon fighting you are getting the ability to throw your weapon, making it superior to Dex-based finesse two weapon fighting.

Statistically, it ought to be a martial weapon.

Sure, eventually you'll do less damage than you would with a greatsword if you are getting multiple attacks, but again, the benefit you are gaining in trade off is that it can be thrown.

Even if you choose to use just one of them instead of a d8 weapon...thrown!

It's a perfectly balanced martial weapon that is listed as a simple weapon. As long as you plan to take advantage of the thrown property at least occasionally, you aren't getting gimped by using a handaxe.

This has been my experience as well. As a simple weapon, it's fantastic for Bards, Clerics, and Monks. As a Thrown Light weapon with the highest damage die, it's not a bad choice for any non-rogue TWF character. Hand Axe sees a lot of play IME.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Even as a tool, I would take a good survival knife over a hand axe every time.

Not me. Don't know about your experience bushcrafting, of course, but the hand ax wins, hands down (no pun intended). You can choke up and treat it very similar to a knife, and it does so much more than a knife can. From chopping to hammering to many other things.


Re: the weapon thing, I guess my point was that many of the inspirations of rangers, woodsmen, and "barbarians" from history never went around with battle axes and swords. They all had hand axes. Both for a tool and for a weapon, because the #1 rule for any object is multi-function. But then again, that goes back to what I was saying about largely ignoring encumbrance rules in the game. When you do this stuff in real life, every pound matters, and matters a lot.

So having a lot of utility and 1d6 dmg vs very little utility and 1d8 dmg, in real life the first is always chosen over the second, while in our games, people almost always choose the second over the first.

Just making an observation is all.

 

[AriochQ]

Not me. Don't know about your experience bushcrafting, of course, but the hand ax wins, hands down (no pun intended). You can choke up and treat it very similar to a knife, and it does so much more than a knife can. From chopping to hammering to many other things.


Re: the weapon thing, I guess my point was that many of the inspirations of rangers, woodsmen, and "barbarians" from history never went around with battle axes and swords. They all had hand axes. Both for a tool and for a weapon, because the #1 rule for any object is multi-function. But then again, that goes back to what I was saying about largely ignoring encumbrance rules in the game. When you do this stuff in real life, every pound matters, and matters a lot.

So having a lot of utility and 1d6 dmg vs very little utility and 1d8 dmg, in real life the first is always chosen over the second, while in our games, people almost always choose the second over the first.

Just making an observation is all.

I have quite a bit of experience and a survival knife is much more useful. Carving and cutting are used far more often than chopping. A good surivival knife can chop when needed. Carving and cutting with an ax? Not so easy. Most hardcore outdoorsmen I know would agree knife>ax if you can only have one tool.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Maybe it depends on where you're from. I'm from the pacific northwest, so there are lots of trees here. I can use a forest axe like an Inupiat Ulu knife, so I have that functionality. And I'd rather not spend all afternoon with a knife trying to chop down a 5" diameter tree when a forest axe does it in minutes. I also wouldn't want to risk breaking the knife handle. When you're looking at dozens of trees like that not only for your shelter frame, but for your fire pit wall, I would not want only a knife at all. About the only thing I wouldn't use the axe for is whittling small projects, and IME, I don't really do that when bushcrafting. I'm almost always chopping or splitting wood for some reason, or using the blade like the aforementioned ulu blade.

Also, when in a survival situation, managing calorie burning is incredibly important. The axe is just way more efficient.

And most people form the northwest I hang with also agree with the axe over the knife. So maybe it's a regional thing

As a matter of fact, two weeks ago I took my son out and one of the lessons was cool vs. tool. We brought out all three blades on the left. After the first day? He agreed he would trade all three for the axe on the left, and it was an obvious choice.

Note: even though there is a tomahawk on the left, it was hardly functional. Since the blade didn't thicken, wood often got caught on the handle when trying to split it. It was also missing a flat end for hammering. Looks cool, but not functional.

 

[DEFCON 1]

A handaxe actually borders on unbalanced. It is a simple weapon that is at least as effective as the martial shortsword and scimitar.

You do the same damage as those weapons, you can dual-wield it, and you can throw it. So basically, if you go Strength-based two-weapon fighting you are getting the ability to throw your weapon, making it superior to Dex-based finesse two weapon fighting.

Statistically, it ought to be a martial weapon.

Sure, eventually you'll do less damage than you would with a greatsword if you are getting multiple attacks, but again, the benefit you are gaining in trade off is that it can be thrown.

Even if you choose to use just one of them instead of a d8 weapon...thrown!

It's a perfectly balanced martial weapon that is listed as a simple weapon. As long as you plan to take advantage of the thrown property at least occasionally, you aren't getting gimped by using a handaxe.

This is all very true. I suspect though that part of the issue that resulted in the OPs query is that I think we are generally less likely to see STR-based dual-wielders than we are DEX-based ones more often than not. Most dual-wielders any of us see will usually be Rogues and Rangers... and thus they'll usually be DEX-based. Fighters that are STR-based that we see will tend to be Great Weapon or Weapon/Shield users except in rarer occasions.

This ends up being why we're less inclined to see handaxe users. Those smaller weapons tend to show up in the hands of dual-wielders, and if most dual-wielders we meet are DEX-based (and thus requiring Finesse weapons)... that's a whole lot of rapiers and shortswords.

It's not impossible to find STR-based dual-wielder PCs, but some players might go a long time before seeing one in play.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Not even that really. Mostly it was an observation that the classes most likely to use them and did use them in real life as their go-to weapon/tool (rangers and barbarians) are almost never seen with them anymore in D&D. As mentioned above, the spear is a similar weapon. They were used as the most common weapon, but hardly anyone actually uses it in the game.

 

[KarinsDad]

I have quite a bit of experience and a survival knife is much more useful. Carving and cutting are used far more often than chopping. A good surivival knife can chop when needed. Carving and cutting with an ax? Not so easy. Most hardcore outdoorsmen I know would agree knife>ax if you can only have one tool.

This. A knife with a serrated top blade in addition to a non-serrated bottom blade does a lot of jobs. Creating snares, gutting fish or game, shaving wood, skinning, cutting branches. If you kill a large animal, try field dressing or deboning it in the field with an axe instead of a knife. Not easy (although splitting bone is easier with two axes).

Deboning

If you are in a situation where you have to create a strong shelter, or are in the dead of winter where wood for a fire can be frozen, then typically an axe is preferable to a knife. But survival knives can handle a lot more jobs than axes can.

Course, this is why many outdoorsmen take a knife, an axe, and/or a saw depending on what they are doing. Trying to pick just one is handicapping yourself.


I do think preference might be a regional thing. In the pacific northwest, most of the trees are coniferous whereas most trees are deciduous in the northeast (unless you are fairly far north). More game in deciduous forests. More lower hanging branches in most deciduous forests. With access to more branch sized wood in a many deciduous forests, an axe is not always needed to create fires or shelters, the primary (but not sole) uses for an axe.

 

[Diamabel]

Not even that really. Mostly it was an observation that the classes most likely to use them and did use them in real life as their go-to weapon/tool (rangers and barbarians) are almost never seen with them anymore in D&D. As mentioned above, the spear is a similar weapon. They were used as the most common weapon, but hardly anyone actually uses it in the game.

If you are expecting battle, you take a weapon- not a tool pressed in to use as a weapon.

Going about day to day life while hunting/crafting shelter, etc.. sure, handaxe it is. Expecting trouble/adventuring? real weapon and armour time.

In a world infested with orcs, goblins and other nastiness- I'd be expecting trouble, and take the weight hit of carrying a real weapon in addition to the tool.