Pros and cons of axes compared to swords 

I'd say the same about the spear.

The spear is more of an AR-15.

+Eeli Tanskanen a spear is way more like an AK

I'd have to say an axe is like an ak and a sword is like an ar-15. A spear would be something like a shotgun

+Jacob Bragg ow? Why a shotgun if I may ask?

***** isnt it a tomahawk on the video technically?

Bozus Think of it as the in-between grounds. The axe has the weight and cracking power a mace does, however it has the edge that does help hacking through rigid materials.

+Bozus half the blunt force of a mace anld the cut of a sword. an axe is high attack low defence. where a sword is 50 50. as a shield with the axe its where it shines

+billybobboberson a general rule for throwing knives or axes is thus -dont throw if it is your only weapon -don throw it if you opponent is UNarmed as they could pick it up and use it don't throw it unless you are immediately ready to attack after the throw.

+Bozus Axes give a bonus to should damage

Or find the rich guy, take him hostage, steal his gear and get a ransom. Takes more skill but also is paid better.

Stonks

stonks

sell the sword, as you are probably a medieval peasant in the scenario, you are probably starving right now, buy a bunch of cows/goats/chickens by selling the sword, and now you have something to feed your poor family with

Can you unscrew the pommel from the rich guys sword?

+guy weinstein what farming would happen with an axe

+Jason Reyes I think he means log chopping.

Collin Buckman guy weinstein wood chopping isnt farming either its more of a tool to cut smaller branches so guy weinstien aes are not farming tools

+Jason Reyes what about farming animals? o.o

Number1Irishlad why would you use an axe for animal slaughter you use knives

Hahaha, Also you can build shelter, make fire, chop wood, and remove the wood from the axe for better storage. Seems more useful I'm not sure a sword is good for chopping wood, but im sure better at cutting tall grass, brush, and jungle like things , kinda like a machete.

@@oscarbear7498 an axe also requires less metal so it is cheaper than a sword.

@@oscarbear7498 actually. Battle axes aren't really that good for chopping wood

@@olp3850 True, but still better than a sword at choping wood.

@@oscarbear7498 depends on the sword, a machete is used for those purposes and it's basically a sword

MastaGambit Yep. Combine that with it's double-use as a tool if necessary (or originally), and it's just a great all around item to have on the battlefield. It's actually very utilitarian if you think about it.

TomDarkwulf87 Indeed, it very much is.

***** That's certainly true. Do you think that could be remedied, say, by adding some sort of cross-guard somewhere on the middle of the axe's shaft? You would still be able to shift where you hold the axe if need-be. Also, since maces don't provide that level of protection either, that's also why I consider it a middle-ground between sword and mace.

***** Ah right I forgot about the balance. But if you're talking about enemies hooking your weapons, well, an axe head can already be just as easily hooked in that manner. While I recognize that guarding is important, I still think an axe is an important tool to help learn of both force and cutting power. I still think axe-and-buckler is a good starter's arrangement.

ivan vasiloff Don't forget that axes have a bonus against shields ;)

ivan vasiloff yeah no shit kharjo

ivan vasiloff Oh and by the way, with axes you get the bonus bleeding damage ;)

***** Actually that would be maces

It would actually be the other way around. An axe is heftier and more awkward than a sword but if you land a hit it does a massive amount of damage as Skall states in his video but a sword would get the agility stat due to the fact that it is lighter and easier to handle because it less awkward Skall also states that somewhat :) (Skall did not word for word state either of these but he implied it so plz nobody freak out this is maninly just my opinion)

Witch a spear you can poke a hole through the swrodman long before they have time to react

+Kingrhem Sure lmao

I have a question for those who have ever sparred with a spear, or anyone with knowledge. When fighting with a spear, in the midst of battle, is it possible or realistic to change where you hold the spear?

I mean, continuously according to the distance between you and your opponent.

Yes. By the way, he also has a video where he handles a spear, and he does just that. Though I don't think there's a a name for it, it's just a normal way to use a spear.

Hatchet or War Axe choose

Well, questionable. Dane axe compare to, for example, carolingian sword? Yes. For example, Battle of Hastings, where saxons have used dane axes versus norman knights' cavalry pikes(but saxons have lost, I must remind). But kriegmesser is more effective in that case, cause you have more control of your weapon. In fact, landsknechts have used kriegmessers for cutting pikes of swissmen.

Someone is overthinking.

The Weapon Triangle is likely more about the weapon users than the weapons. The typical lance user in Fire Emblem is a heavily armored soldier, and axes are great against that type of opponent. The typical sword user is an agile striker and dodger, and axes are too clumsy against those types of foes, but the range advantage provided by a lance hampers sword users quite a bit when they clash with spearmen/spearwomen.

Check out this reply on GameFAQs. I think that the weapon triangle has more thought put into it than that for which you give it credit. www.gamefaqs.com/boards/204447-fire-emblem-heroes/75007370?page=2#22

You can always just flip the axe and end them with the handle.

+0hn0haha Unscrew the handle and throw it vigorously?

+0hn0haha Take off the head and act like it's a pommel.

Still have to take your spear and shield under your arm.

+0hn0haha flip it round and use the hammer

It's not like you'll find yourself having to choose from an axe and a sword on the battlefield any time soon, but this information and criticism all seems rather valid.

AsifIcarebear3 You never know... after third worldwar maybe? ;)

Strongpoint100 I doubt there is going to be a World War where citizens have to get involved themselves.

Civilians were already involved in WWII tho. Half of the deaths were civilians, and so needed to protect themselves like when the Nazis attacked Russia, but also in other places. Also, many people were drafted all over the world, and so might not have known how to fight, or been attacked before fully trained.

Or resort to designated melee weapons instead of guns

Happy birthday then!

***** thank you kind sir! Acknowledge of viewership at its finest!

***** The Axe is better at penetrating armor especially if it has a spike on the other side, if you have a hammer like the one in the video you can still bash plate armor in and cause blunt trauma even so thin bladed war axes such as the Danish War Axe fell out of use once plate came to be popular, they were great at cleaving through maile and leather and even lammellar style armor the Norse and other cultures used before this but solid plate became a problem especially if it was ridged, while the axe could knock you off a horse or on your ass it did little to actually penetrate the armor and not harming the man inside. This is why smaller axes with thicker heads and spikes became the weapon of choice either in a horsemen's form with a shorter handle or in a pike form with a longer handle such as the pole axe or a bec de corbin (Ravens beak). Swords are not were pretty much useless at penetrating plate and even good maile, this is why swords starting to be made with a serious taper down to the point and with stiffer blades in order to be able to find the areas between the armor plate and thrust in to wound the man inside.

Eric Moore it's funny how people find better ways to kill each other, instead of just finding out how to get along.

You have that right.

Let Undyne suplex you or let San use Gaster Blaster shoot you

Just Noob How do you even know I like Undertale?

"Begins to unscrew pommel"

I was wondering why he was unscrewing his pummel...Then it hit me....

man theese pommel puns must be pummel- no, no kill me im sorry...

+long live the beard Yes, that would be a good reinforcement.

+long live the beard Then again. The shaft is both easy and cheap to replace. It only really need to survive one battle.

Thomas Johansson that is true, but id rather not spend the time replacing the shaft. i think its a better alternitive to spend the money on leather once, and replace it when needed.

***** i have heard that vikings may have actulay done that, however since i dont have any sorces its only a posiblity

+long live the beard hehheh, he said shaft damage.

They have beards & have suicidal tendencies....so....yeah. LOL! All we have to do now is put smiley faces on them as we scream WODAN!

But with swords you get more reach

TWolf2001 The God-Hand First-Strike, Critical-Strike, Any-Strike, Unhindered-Strike, Final-Strike Spear, Axe, Sword, Hammer, Long-Knife are the closest physical representations of these principles. Swords do in general win at combat, but there is a reason why the Nobles still wielded axes more often than swords. Fear is a more potent weapon than Force.....& the Axe has both. When you see your brother go down in one strike & your sword doesn't do the same thing, you begin to lose hope, especially if they are armored, carry shields, & are in a conjunctive formation with spear-men, who don't give a shit about the puny reach of your sword. But yeah, in a duel, a swordsman is more likely to win....but not outright & far less if he is up against an axe & shield, regardless of how big his sword is.

Ben But can you unscrew the pommel? No.

Drako Mallari End him rightly!

I can see that. With a shield I think an axe is awesome.

+Rofl Harris same, but from the us

It could break.

+Skallagrim Oh really? Can I ask why?

The harder the metal, the more brittle it gets.

+Wall Of Hooliganism Really? weird. you'd expect the opposite.

HellishWeavile Gaming Glass is extremely hard, yet it shatters easily. A sword needs both hardness and toughness to withstand impact without breaking.

Drako Mallari Obviously any weapon that doesn't have an unscrewable pommel is worth little more than scrap metal.

Drako Mallari This has got to be one of the only genuinely funny in-jokes on the internet.

Jakob Cook Huh, no wonder the katana looks so fucky.

a Mindfish it honestly gets me every time so funny

Hahaha so true!! Drako Mallari

+Jayvee Robrigado Kind of. A Sword has more defensive capabilities than an axe. So in range the sword should trump the axe given equal skill. If the spearmen lets the axemen get close enough to cut him, the raw bite of the axe can actually not cut through the spear, but rend it useless for awhile, making them both draw a different weapon. Fastest one wins there.. Now the hard one. Spear versus Sword. Historically a spear is by far one of the most simplest weapons to use, sure there are styles (I personally adore Blunt Edge style which uses a polearm's shaft to disable the opponent, and then jab the head in with a reverse to end him) but the end goal is the same. Thrust, and control distance. That is why the lance beats the sword, because the spear has massive reach compared to a sword, but an axe man can use that reach against them.

+Jayvee Robrigado Fire Emblem fan in the house? :P

+Jayvee Robrigado I find it hard to picture an axeman beating a spearman of equal skill. The range is just, frankly, unfair.

+Gabriel Rodriguez Well its more that a spear is much easier to damage or break with an axe then with a sword. Even if you don't break the haft, even minor damage will compromise the spear's effectiveness.

+Gabriel Rodriguez One mistake from spear wielder and he is done. True range for both weapons has huge difference but if you manage to block the first spear strike or rather lead the spear head away from you like you would block a punch with swing like motion the spear wielder would be done unless he managed to draw out his knife, seax or sword but thats a whole different weapon as spear would become useless because axe wielder would move in for close combat.

This is something I would definitely like to see.

I've never handled a rapier unfortunately. I'd love to but you know how it goes... so much interesting stuff, so little money.

***** I'll say this much. They happen to be very fast, very light, but they lack in the power category. You aren't going to be knocking anyone's guard to the side, and in most cases you won't be able to slash very well, but the thrusts are second to none. My favorite, the Espada Ropera, has a large guard that will protect the hand quite well and is quite good for guard bashing. The pommels aren't very good at crushing armor, but I have once poked through the plates in a set of armor I was practicing on (and this was some pretty good leather armor.) The best choice is to carry a buckler to compensate for the relative easy guard to break. I believe you are familiar with the techniques of buckler-sword combat.

Pardoner Oswald Rapiers are not light, they weight the same than regular sword but are much longer

Pardoner Oswald Really - light and easy to maneuver? I have wielded a lot of weapons, but when I had my hands on a rapier, I thought that it's the most awkward and inefficient design - they feel really heavy compared to any other weapon you will hold in one hand. The mace is 60-70% size of a rapier and it wieghts about the same - however, just like Skall said, axe (and mace) are hard to maneuver in mid-swing because of their point of balanced. The hand-and-a-half sword is maybe the most comfortable sword to use as a newbie because you have a very strong grip with both arms => very good control. Sorry, but I think you used some sort of longer foil or something, because rapiers feel really cumbersome compared to other weapons. I don't say that they are not good, but that you need some practice in order to use them in an efficient way - more than other one handed weapons do.

People mostly still traded precious metals, gold, silver & items back then :P

Axe, Home Depot. Sword, Ebay.

Good sword: $2000. Good axe: $60

rsbandbj1 He meant how much they would cost in medieval times in today's dollar value.

Don Evenson indeed, I found some pawn shop fighting axes for $45 and $60 but they had bad dents and the $45 was just the head of the thing, the handle was missing and even then it looked very blunt!

Fernandino Alonsini more like youre helping them end your career man

Hook your axe beard over your foe's weapon and slightly retract for one point of contact, Parry it away, Then twist your axe on its longitudinal shaft axis to catch their weapon between your blade beard and your haft to create a bind, Then rotate at your wrist to wrench their weapon out of their hand. --- Alternatively, hook 'em and retract 'em, Twist 'em and bind 'em for a moment, Then quickly untwist to release the bind1 and thrust your axe blade's upper horn at their face or throat or weapon arm.

Sorry to break it for you, but the idea of fighting 70 enemies at once is utter bullshit. It's pure anime fantasy, or maybe something that overly vain swordsmen made up to boast about their supposedly god-like skills. But it's complete nonsense. Even an experienced fighter will have a hard time against "only" three opponents who know what they're doing. The only chance is tactical maneuvering to make sure you're not facing more than one opponent at a time, but guess what... they will use tactical maneuvering as well and try to attack you from different directions.

***** Nono547 omitted the fact that (and this particular duel is historically documented, also documented in The tale of 5 rings written by below named individual) that whilst Miamito Musashi did take on an entire sword school of 70+ practitioners... It was 70+ individual duels back to back, as was the custom in Japan during that period if a ronin/samurai wanted to take over a dojo. I.E. if you wanted to take over a dojo you challenge the master of said establishment (which is a huge convoluted ceremony) and then his students (lowest skill level to the highest) test your mettle as it were before the Shi'doshi (sensei) will even consider whether or not he'll fight you. Anyhow I hope that clears up what Nono547 was trying to get at. ^_^

So no video about it I suppose :p. But you know I already knew that this very part of the story was probably a big load of fantaisy, still this guy has realy exist, and it seems that he has kill every one of the member of a school of swordsmen or at least this is what history remember (maybe he burns the school down and then say "I am the greatest sworman of all time :p" who knows). Yet the guy has wrighten about fight against multiple opponent, my question was not do you think it is realistic (which is not^^, but still cool^^) but more what our ancetors had wrighten about fight against multiple opponent, which they certainly had since in a war for instance you are not in a proper duel (. Thank for the anwser even if I was hopping about something more detail about it but i suppose there is not a lot more to tell about it. Have a nice day! PS: you should definitively read this manga if you are not completly ermetic to the genre, it is totaly awesome even though it is not historically accurate.

nono547 Yes, historical manuals sometimes cover fighting against multiple opponents, although generally the European treatises deal mostly with duels in particular.

***** Historical manuals do cover multiple assonants but this is rare. Manuals are usually for gentleman's dueling arts, and were not a soldier's basic training manual (this is because most soldiers couldn't read.). Howeaver, there is one historical manual written for the purpose of training soldiers to fight with the basket hilted claymore written by one Thomas Page who was a very famous duleist of the Scottish Highlands. I am part of a fencing club which works using his manual of combat (which you cna read in it's entirity here: www.sirwilliamhope.org/Library/Page/Page.php ) which he wrote at the behest of a lord for the purpose of giving a training method to the Lord's drill instructors. While it is intended as a beginner's guide to the sword, it is also written for people who will be fighting in mass battles and thus includes guards and attacks which are highly effective against multiple opponents, but also tricks to maneuver around a battlefield and not trip over corpses. I have been a member of the class for 2 years, with 2 hour classes once a week and am able to hold my own in sparring against up to 16 of my classmates with my sword only, (Though I may not count as I also know other swords styles and am the co-instructor) and up to the full 20 others (instructor not included) if I also have a shield. If you tried hard enough, and got in enoguh practice you just might be able to get to the 70 mark. Though historically a knight/samurai who could take on 20 men and win was what could be expected as normal, and 30 would be extraordinary, more then that would be unheard of (Not that it did not happen happen, just that it would make you an instant legend who's powers of arms would be well given the fishing story treatment by peasants.)

One can use swords for lots of tasks, just their design isn't really intended for much other than chopping, slicing and/or piercing through plants, animals and/or other people. I've seen a few creative uses of swords.

You forgot sword juggling :)

stefstefstef6789 And swallowing

I wouldn't recommend a sword for woodcutting, though. It'd probably break. Hunting, though, sure, and cutting thin plants could work, if you needed to.

You get it wrong axes are uni tasker becouse you can only chop with them with sword you can slice, thrust and do pomel and guard strikes and axe is ekhm for peasents

+TheCaptainsAntics No, never seen that. Tomahawk and knife fighting exists though.

+TheCaptainsAntics would be logical though... shield breaks... drop it and draw your axe... should have been quite common... so not "noteworthy" for the purpose of sagas and storytelling...

+Skallagrim yeah I heard about that... From assassins creed 3 XD

+TheCaptainsAntics as far as I know, no one would do it if there is a choice, because at the time axes were a popular weapon, the swords were rarely used to parry, the shied was used for that purpose almost exclusively (at least a small one). So having two weapons would leave the combatant exposed.

Exactly, not by choice but it seems like it would be more then uncommon for someone to be attacked while lumbering for a fire as a soldier. Shield are a bit heavy to take lumbering.

For example: I'm taking your notes about axes here to heart, and will make sure characters with axes keep it swinging when they're ready to strike. However, the thing about turning around exposing your back, I'm semi-ignoring, but only because the character's got a protective shell on his back.

Why don't bullets have parachutes?

Mistah Bryan In India there were some, and in medieval Europe as well (although rare).

You see them in the ancient Minoan Crete culture, but I think more for cult reasons.

Thank you gentlemen for your prompt reply :)

I used a double headed wood cutting axe to cut wood at a civil war reenactment. I think he idea is that you can use the other side once one gets dull, and it's balanced. A lot of them have some kind of metal balance thing like a pike or hammer. Why not a second axe? Not the perfect answer to your question, but some info hat might help.

Mistah Bryan yes, there were! but they wer (almost) never used as a weapon, they are used as a tool, and a perfectly good one at that! Adrian Ivashkov had it partly right, the "other" side was normally used to help with the rooting of a cut tree, and this side was more dull and course, since it was often striking into the ground, this was epic since the one side was kept razor sharp to cut the trees down in a jiffy! they are also a dream to cut down trees with, cause of the added weight! :)

Not if you're in an anime!

***** You'd probably have a 2 ton sword with a blade as large as a battleship that is embedded with ice and fire that could cause earth-shattering blows. This would probably vaporize your whole entire body and soul.

Purpose-made battle axes aren't great for that either, to be fair.

Thallanar Rabidtooth A sword with a dagger would be a brilliant combo! At least, I think it would. I'm no expert, so don't quote me on that. :3

A sword and dagger is more of a rapir thing since you can actually parry one with a parry dagger. Against other swords there's just to much energy going with it. I'm thinking more of arming swords. That being said you still could it would probably be a counter weapon though. Block with your sword go in with your dagger.

Thallanar Rabidtooth I'd say you have it spot on; the only way dual wielding is viable when it comes to axes is with other axes. And honestly, I could totally see that as viable in hand-to-had combat; take a swing with one axe, use the other to parry and pull the opponent's weapon out of the way, bring the first one back around for the hit. has a sort of beauty to it, imagining the two blades swirling around a fighter

"dual wielding" is nice trait from the computer games! : ) Real warriors, like for example, the Roman legion, had short stabbing swords and very, very large shields. Ask them about "dual wielding" - at least you should afford them a good laugh : )

Robert Tauzer To each their own, I guess. If you don't agree with it, good for you. Doesn't mean that others can't have an interest in it. Me, I just like the idea of an all-offense fighting style, giving oneself entirely to the attack. Always been a bit of a berserker enthusiast

Un Known Vikings used swords, axes, and spears.. but nice try tho.

+Alexander Evensen pretty much, yes, though the comparison I often use is between an assault rifle or pistol (sword) and shotgun (axe). The closest modern comparison to the sword is the sidearm, pistol or revolver. Swords have no tool purpose (machetes are a separate category), and were designed for one purpose only- killing people. Shotguns and rifles are useful for hunting as well as war, and compare to axes and spears respectively, but the sidearm was designed from the ground up for the purpose of killing people, thereby filling a similar paradigm.

Wrong, a sword isn’t “magnificent better” than an axe. It depends on the fighter’s skill. Many people preferred axes or hammers over swords, specifically against armor a sword is virtually useless, an axe has the blade where it’s most effective and the weight and mass of it adds blunt capabilities. It’s clearly a matter of preference, to me axe is better, but I’m not claiming it’s a better weapon than a sword

mouthpiece200 Only if you're an untrained amateur.

***** In most military situations I would guess they'd be in too close of quarters for that. They'd give all their neighbors a headache, especially if they were trying to stay close enough to make a shield wall.

That's ridiculous. It doesn't matter if you're using a sword or an axe, nobody stands close enough for that to happen out of common sense. If you're all clustered together to where you can't even swing a sword or axe, you're probably not winning that fight. The only scenario I can think of where amateur soldiers would willingly stand next to each other would be in a line of pike men. If you think that an experienced axe user can't control where his blade goes, I ask how you think master swordsmen and archers and the like function.

Matthew Leonard That's why I say they don't do fancy moves in the battle lines, they don't have room to. Because they DO stand close together. Axes and swords are not for swinging, in close quarter fights. They are for quick hacks and chops. Fighting in a heavy battle is not the same as one giant duel - the entire weapons strategy changes. Swordsmen and archers are not in serious risk of busting their head open - a swinging axman is. Hard to become a master at something if the practice itself will kill ya. I bet the general would lose as many poor lads teaching them the technique as would be saved by it.

***** Like most peasants?

Niphen Niphen I have that problem because of my genetics I naturally have a reddish beard and brown hair.

Niphen Niphen I got the same thing going on with my face too

Mine is the other way around, being dark black compared to my hair which is dark brown. Pretty weird. I think dark haired people have beards that are darker than their hair, while lighter haired people have beards that are lighter than their hair. But I’m not sure cause I just made that up now, but it sounds right.

***** please look at museums. Most axeheads of waraxes were thinner than swordblades and much lighter...

***** weight is not imortant - what is is the point of balance, the shape and acceleration / leverage. Axes are not good against armor - thats what spikes and hammers are for. An axe did have advantages but it was not meant to be armorpiercing or inflicht damage beyond chainmail. a battle axe was light and handy because you want to swing around quickly with it annd use the leverage for more oomph - but actually piercing plate amor is easier with a sword than with an axe.

***** dude they were used to stab...the hell did you ever look into axes as topic? the axeheads of waraxes either provide a spike or the axehead is shaped so that you can stab with it - maybe not as well as with a sword or spear but axes can be and were used to thrust at opponents. and they were also used for draw and push cuts. chopping is mainly for felling axes... and the point of balance was not as important in battleaxes those tended to bemore center balanced (choppers top swords bottom balanced) the leverage is what creates the oomph mainly. Axes barely work against armor....

***** and thats how you got no idea at all...please just look at historical battle axes or visit museums or asked a hema expert as you have no idea how battle axes differ from woodchoppers...