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

[Sacrosanct]

Perhaps what we should do is be more specific. Because, in general, I agree that people lump "anything to do with crawling/surviving a dungeon" in the same category as "anything to do with traversing/surviving the wilderness," and that might be part of the problem. As long as the "survive the world-environment" type stuff is merely a subset of another category, rather than a completely developed category in its own right, it's probably going to get a short shrift.

In the spirit of that, I propose separating delving, which has to do with traps, locks, secret doors, "dungeoneering," and all manner of "survive this hellhole fortress" things, from expedition, which has to do with creating shelter, finding sustenance, logistics, establishing a safe perimeter, and all manner of "make sure the environment doesn't kill you" things.

There are a lot of classes that get "delving" support. Apart from the Ranger and Barbarian (and maybe Rogue), I'm not sure there are classes that get much inherent "expedition" support--though being a full caster goes a long way, because spells can do nearly everything. To the best of my knowledge, "delving" can be supported by a variety of skills, while "expedition" is almost completely siloed into Nature and Survival; similarly, I'm not sure there really are that many tool proficiencies or background benefits that are much use for "expedition," but I could be wrong. I, personally, would like to see all classes have discrete, declarative, non-generic abilities for each pillar, that don't compete for resources with other pillars. I'd like to see items, like the hand axe, which trade a small amount of offense potential for a nice suite of other benefits, such that they'll be a nice balance-point, saving weight while working multiple jobs.

I'd support some sort of unique class features that are explicit rather than implied as they impact non-combat related pillars, if not for anything else, to bring those pillars back into game play. Heck, not even class based, but background based as well.

 

[Agamon]

A hand axe is a great tool, but I think it's actually not a bad weapon.

I never said it was a bad weapon. It beats a brick of cheese in the I'm-going-to-hurt-you department.

Just saying, there is a reason for the proliferation of swords prior to the industrial revolution. A hand axe should be a feasible weapon, but it needn't be comparable.

 

[Diamabel]

For purposes of utility, they can be, and have been, both. I.e., the combat tomahawk here is just as functional as a forest axe in every way, including the hammering side.

Which is why I pointed out that there is some overlap, but they are optimized for different tasks.

 

[Zaruthustran]

I think you misjudge the popularity of the hand axe.

Each and every one of my characters, even mages, carries a hand axe. It's the most useful item in the game.

It's a melee weapon. Which can be dual-wielded by anyone.
It's a ranged weapon (technically, a melee weapon that can be used to make ranged attacks).
You can use the blade side of the head to chop or slice things, such as wood or rope.
You can use the blunt side of the head to smash or hammer things, such as iron spikes or stone.
You can wedge it under a door to prevent it from opening.
You can tie a rope around it, and toss it as a makeshift grapple (for tree limb forks, railings, arrow slits, and appropriate anchors).
You can sharpen the handle as a handy stake, for tent posts or vampires.

It's just too crazy useful. It's part of the standard kit of any adventurer I make.

 

[Erechel]

I have only one thing to say if you go through the jungle: machetes beat axes and knifes. And they work as swords. They are a standard weapon and tool on Paraguayan army, even when firearms are readily available. But machetes can cut passways through the jungle, and are also useful on ambushes. They also cut wood with ease.
I had a military friend from the Argentinian border with Paraguay, and he say that the paraguayan soldiers were exceptional on survivalism. I also know a few cases in which a paraguayan armed with a machete killed two gun-armed thiefs in La Plata city (isn't a jungle city, but a plains one in Argentina). The paraguayan act like crazy because the thieves hit his younger brother, and killed the lights with a swing, and attacked the robbers. Traveling as a hitchicker for northern Argentina requires a machete.

 

[Gradine]

Can't monks use hand axes in their primary attack?

Yeah, I had a Wood Elf Shadow Monk that used hand axes; he was a hell of a lot of fun play.

 

[TheNoremac42]

I see people complaining about hand-axes being too OP for simple weapons and should be martial weapons (or have their damage reduced). However, historically, that is not the case. Hand-axes were the everyman's weapon. The were cheap, had multiple uses, and you didn't need a whole lot of skill in order to fight with one. They also did just as much damage as swords - at least against armored targets. In contrast, swords take a lot of skill to both make and use. You have to swing it at just the right angle at an armored target or the blade will just bounce off.

 

[BookBarbarian]

Always nice to see an old thread pop up after two years.

Handaxes are still awesome. My Barbarians, Str-Fighters, and Str-Rangers always carry two of them.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I see people complaining about hand-axes being too OP for simple weapons and should be martial weapons (or have their damage reduced). However, historically, that is not the case. Hand-axes were the everyman's weapon. The were cheap, had multiple uses, and you didn't need a whole lot of skill in order to fight with one. They also did just as much damage as swords - at least against armored targets. In contrast, swords take a lot of skill to both make and use. You have to swing it at just the right angle at an armored target or the blade will just bounce off.

The "OP" complaints are generally only from people who have tried to analyse the 5e weapons table as a balanced, point-buy system. And found that the hand axe, along with other weapons seem to be built with too many points in their own system.

It works fine where it is IMO. Its not pushing the generally-used martial weapons off their place, but it makes a common backup weapon. Its also good for those "everyman heroes" as you say, without the military training to use a better weapon.

 

[nswanson27]

The "OP" complaints are generally only from people who have tried to analyse the 5e weapons table as a balanced, point-buy system. And found that the hand axe, along with other weapons seem to be built with too many points in their own system.

It works fine where it is IMO. Its not pushing the generally-used martial weapons off their place, but it makes a common backup weapon. Its also good for those "everyman heroes" as you say, without the military training to use a better weapon.

Second this. Fundamentally there has been nothing, implied or otherwise, to suggest that the weapons were all intended to be on the same tier. Same is true with spells, and items as well. The fact that a given weapon has a niche use case is good enough.