Why hasn't WAR been switched to blunt?

[Chronons]

While I can appreciate a good quip as much as the next guy, axes have never really been "slashing" weapons. Their small cutting edges are more likely to stick in an unarmored opponent and really shine in their ability to perform blunt force trauma in armored ones. The only difference between a hammer and an ax is a bevel. That being said, in a game where we ride around on giant chickens fighting gods created by peoples wishes and magic..... The aesthetics are a moot point I think.

Snip.

Thank you for the insight on the mechanical changes that would occur as a result of a change. I am curious as to how much of a dps change we would see in MNK and would like to compare it to the current standard DRG comp. I also wonder if there is an advantage to be gained in giving the slashing debuff to either PLD or DRK alone, not both. Not that SE would ever actually implement this, just out of curiosities sake.

[Rhais]

While I can appreciate a good quip as much as the next guy, axes have never really been "slashing" weapons. Their small cutting edges are more likely to stick in an unarmored opponent and really shine in their ability to perform blunt force trauma in armored ones. The only difference between a hammer and an ax is a bevel.

You don't ever see executioners take people's heads off with a hammer, or see people choose a hammer for chopping firewood.

[Chronons]

You don't ever see executioners take people's heads off with a hammer, or see people choose a hammer for chopping firewood.

Yeah.... those things have a bevel..... like i said......

[CookieMonsta]

You don't ever see executioners take people's heads off with a hammer, or see people choose a hammer for chopping firewood.

Fell slam instead cleave

[Tactical]

Fell slam instead cleave

warrior confirmed for being pro basketball players

[Ilan]

warrior confirmed for being pro basketball players

I smell Darius incomming.

[FallenWings]

While I can appreciate a good quip as much as the next guy, axes have never really been "slashing" weapons. Their small cutting edges are more likely to stick in an unarmored opponent and really shine in their ability to perform blunt force trauma in armored ones. The only difference between a hammer and an ax is a bevel. That being said, in a game where we ride around on giant chickens fighting gods created by peoples wishes and magic..... The aesthetics are a moot point I think.

Axes or Ax is literally a sharp hammer with a cutting edge. You cut trees or people with them, not beat them.

They CAN smash but are designed to cleave or slice.

Just because you CAN smash an armored foe with an axe, does not take away it's main purpose of severing. Much like how a great sword can be used as a giant bludgeoning stick.

To have axes be blunt, makes literally no sense. Because it'd just be a hammer at that point.

PLD having a blunt resist down application from its shield makes more sense aesthetically and logically.

[Chronons]

Snip

While the aesthetics were not the intent of the question to begin with, since so many want to challenge me on it I suppose i'll bite.

The cutting head of an ax (the beveled portion) is NOT designed that way because an ax is a cutting weapon. It is designed that way because that is the most efficient design for a wedge. An ax heads purpose is to focus the force generated by the weight of the head when swung. The thinner the bevel is, the more concentrated the force is. Ever tried to skin an animal with an ax? or even slice some tomatoes? That is because its designed to be a chopping implement, not a cutting one.

Both an ax and a sword are mechanical levers. The difference is that the weight is distributed on opposite sides. The majority of the weight in an average sword is in the handle towards the pommel. That means when you strike a target the force in your swing will be equally applied back against the blade. Since the weight is at the handle its natural response is to compensate at that fulcrum point, allowing you to slash across a target - taking the blade from one corner to the other. Axes have the majority of their weight in the tip. They are designed to push through an intended target, initially for making chopping wood easier. If you strike a target axes are more than likely going to bury themselves into whatever you hit, not slash across it. Since all the weight is at the tip, you are at a severe disadvantage in controlling the forward momentum of the weapon as compared to a sword.

I will still contend that the majority of damage that axes generate are due to their ability to create blunt force trauma not cutting potential. Its more efficient to cut with speed, not weight. Which is why swords have always been preferred for cutting. Its not that axes CAN be used against armor, they became preferred over swords in some cased because of the blunt force trauma they create. The "main" purpose of an ax is to chop - not cut, sever, or slice. Furthermore, a hammer with a 5lb head and an ax with a 5lb head will generate an equal amount of force when swung. The only difference is the surface area that weight is distribute on. Perhaps an ax is not totally a blunt damage weapon, but it is certainly not a slashing one either.

[Ilan]

A axe is still a slashing weapon, if you like it or not. You can't slice tomatoes or skin animals with most swords. Does that make swords to blunt weapons now too?

[FallenWings]

While the aesthetics were not the intent of the question to begin with, since so many want to challenge me on it I suppose i'll bite.

The cutting head of an ax (the beveled portion) is NOT designed that way because an ax is a cutting weapon. It is designed that way because that is the most efficient design for a wedge. An ax heads purpose is to focus the force generated by the weight of the head when swung. The thinner the bevel is, the more concentrated the force is. Ever tried to skin an animal with an ax? or even slice some tomatoes? That is because its designed to be a chopping implement, not a cutting one.

Both an ax and a sword are mechanical levers. The difference is that the weight is distributed on opposite sides. The majority of the weight in an average sword is in the handle towards the pommel. That means when you strike a target the force in your swing will be equally applied back against the blade. Since the weight is at the handle its natural response is to compensate at that fulcrum point, allowing you to slash across a target - taking the blade from one corner to the other. Axes have the majority of their weight in the tip. They are designed to push through an intended target, initially for making chopping wood easier. If you strike a target axes are more than likely going to bury themselves into whatever you hit, not slash across it. Since all the weight is at the tip, you are at a severe disadvantage in controlling the forward momentum of the weapon as compared to a sword.

I will still contend that the majority of damage that axes generate are due to their ability to create blunt force trauma not cutting potential. Its more efficient to cut with speed, not weight. Which is why swords have always been preferred for cutting. Its not that axes CAN be used against armor, they became preferred over swords in some cased because of the blunt force trauma they create. The "main" purpose of an ax is to chop - not cut, sever, or slice. Furthermore, a hammer with a 5lb head and an ax with a 5lb head will generate an equal amount of force when swung. The only difference is the surface area that weight is distribute on. Perhaps an ax is not totally a blunt damage weapon, but it is certainly not a slashing one either.

You are correct in that axes are more about application of power in strikes hence the focus on use for chops. But ultimately, it still severs flesh or split things in two no matter which way you (hur) slice it. A hammer does not cut or slice.

To counterpoint, the argument is mostly prevalent in Felling axes, aka axes used for cutting trees which were designed with a thicker wedge for the stronger hammering effect.

War axes/battle axes conversely, are designed to be thinner blades that are better at severing flesh and avoid getting lodged between rib cages, so they have better uses as slashing weapons.

At the end of the day, swords and axes fall short of inflicting actual serious damage against plated armor that warhammers can do. I don't feel the need to make this change when it can easily be given to an actual warhammer wielding job in which people would more easily make the connection of: hammer -> Blunt damage.