Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5956282" data-attributes="member: 87792">That depends - and I think you're thinking of D&D aesthetic choices and then trying to apply real world standards to them.  Even on such oversized axes as the daneaxe (below) there wasn't too much mass to the head, so although the momentum they can produce is massive the weight and effort is probably less than to carry a large round or kite shield for combat.  (Speaking from decade-old reenactment experience).<img src="http://www.bbc.co.uk/wiltshire/content/images/2005/08/25/vikings_3755_300x400.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" />And there's the hitch.  Closing with your opponent is something they shouldn't allow.  The Daneaxe isn't the best weapon for preventing this, admittedly.  I'd much rather a halberd.In practice it's all you imagine and worse.  When I used to do reenactment fighting, one of our common line drills was five people with sword and board vs three people with spears and no shield.  The odds were heavily in favour of the three as long as there was any sort of virtual anchor on the flanks (i.e. we had to stay in line) even if any one swordsman was more than a match on average for a spearman.(The vikings fought with spear and shield - the spear held overhand to stab at the eyes.  But that's going to be far too dangerous for reenactors).At that point you need to ask "Why the hell was he allowed to get in grapple range?"  No one can move their body as fast as someone with a daneaxe can move the head of an axe.  Or more normally someone with a sword or pointy polearm (halberd, glaive, etc.) can move the head of their weapon, and in these cases they just need to move the point of their weapon between themselves and you.And the answer to a quick stab is "no."  A quick slash, yes.  But to make a quick stab you need to change direction twice from the shoulder - first you need to draw back your hand and then you need to bring it forward.  If anything it's easier to make an extra quick strike with a Pollax/Bec De Corbin/Lucerne Hammer/the family being played with in Balesir's video.  You bring the head of the axe round, pivot it round the block point, and then stab their feet or trip them with the other end.The second issue is that even a 6" stab is pretty fatal anywhere on the torso (although may take some time for a gut-wound) and you need to commit from the shoulder, giving you no speed advantage.  Light slashes are fast - but the wounds are comparatively superficial.  They are, I believe, used a lot in contemporary knife fighting because they do damage and don't leave you exposed in the same way.You're probably thinking of the side-sword or some smallsword variants not the rapier (a common mistake).  The rapier is a stabbing-only weapon (as for that matter is the épée) and in both cases part of the idea is keeping the point between you and the enemy's body.  Yes, for heavier blades, you need to move from the shoulder.  But most swords were very well balanced precisely to make them fast and easy to wield. I'd favour a free attack for anything remotely long and pointy - if the free attack succeeds the dagger wielder doesn't get close enough to be able to reach.</blockquote>

Verification