Weapon attributes : V

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:39 pm

Swords (+Crit)
Axes (+Bleed dmg)

The question is, out of a more realistic standpoint of weaponry physics and anatomy, wouldn't axes do critical damage while swords are more inclined to cause arterial bleeding as they can stab with a wide gaping hole?

Maybe I'm wrong but I was just curious.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:34 am

it's not really the weapons but as the category they're(as axes fall in blunt) and blunt does more internal damage than swords do

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 6:47 pm

Swords (+Crit)
Axes (+Bleed dmg)

The question is, out of a more realistic standpoint of weaponry physics and anatomy, wouldn't axes do critical damage while swords are more inclined to cause arterial bleeding as they can stab with a wide gaping hole?

Maybe I'm wrong but I was just curious.

Swords are generally more lighter than axes thus they used more as a slashing and lacerations which inflicts mild amounts of bleeding but nothing specific, however an axe is kind of like a hammer and a blade, its heavy, a slow swing, and when it hits the blade cuts into the target, pushes in and causes immense bleeding and trauma.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:02 pm

Swords are generally more lighter than axes thus they used more as a slashing and lacerations which inflicts mild amounts of bleeding but nothing specific, however an axe is kind of like a hammer and a blade, its heavy, a slow swing, and when it hits the blade cuts into the target, pushes in and causes immense bleeding and trauma.

And that axe being heavy, you'd think the strike would cause periodic critical hits (lucky shot with the blow that hits far harder, doing more damage)
I don't see a light sword doing critical hits as it doesn't hit hard enough, but that's just me.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 5:22 am

yeah, because axes dont leave more serious gaping wounds

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 11:27 am

yeah, because axes dont leave more serious gaping wounds

Exactly, unlike a sword that is driven through someone causing serious internal and arterial bleeding.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:26 pm

it's not really the weapons but as the category they're(as axes fall in blunt) and blunt does more internal damage than swords do

maces are the blunt weapons.

I agree with OP.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 6:28 am

If you want it realistic, do you also want dragons removed? I'm just going on your logic here...

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 5:11 pm

I'm more concerned with balance. Unless the bleed causes quite a bit more damage over time than a hit, bleed would be useless. doing more damage per hit and hitting more often would be much better.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 11:48 am

Niether since they dont do either you get perks for them.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 12:28 pm

Last time I checked, Axes aren't blunt. How would you cut through an oak if an axe is blunt?

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:33 am

It would seem to make more sense that way... a hit with an axe seems far more likely to do critical, lethal damage, whereas a hit with a sword seems more inclined to cause lacerations and hemorrhaging.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 5:52 pm

If you want it realistic, do you also want dragons removed? I'm just going on your logic here...

Obviously, (as with most threads on this forum), we deal with/discuss realism in the confines of the fantasy world of skyrim. duh.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 12:16 pm

If you want it realistic, do you also want dragons removed? I'm just going on your logic here...

That's lore, this is an issue of weapon logic. If bare hands caused decapitation it wouldn't make sense. What I mean by this is the perks for the weapons. I know it isn't a quality of the weapon itself, but the perk should be characteristic to the weapon itself.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 4:54 pm

Last time I checked, Axes aren't blunt. How would you cut through an oak if an axe is blunt?

I wish you'd told that to Bethesda circa 2005.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 3:15 am

Speaking in game terms:

A sword causes minor damage compared to an axe unless it hits a major artery or organ (this being the critical hit).

An axe causes large, gaping wounds and would thus cause bleeding damage.

A mace dents and crushes armor and thus negates its effectiveness.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:24 pm

Speaking in game terms:

A sword causes minor damage compared to an axe unless it hits a major artery or organ (this being the critical hit).

An axe causes large, gaping wounds and would thus cause bleeding damage.

A mace dents and crushes armor and thus negates its effectiveness.

But wouldn't that sword cutting that artery cause bleeding damage since arterial bleeding is more severe? Critical hit is a severe punshing blow as per, breaking a bone (which is what an axe can do when it cuts through flesh) or causing immediate shock for a few seconds.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 6:32 am

Realistically I dont gain perks and level up
Realistically weapons dont actually score critical hits
out of a more realistic standpoint of weaponry physics and anatomy, skyrim doesn't exist
I guess thats why its a game

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:15 am

Exactly, unlike a sword that is driven through someone causing serious internal and arterial bleeding.

When's the last time you drove a sword completely through somebody? I'm sure it's harder than they make it look in video games.

» Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:16 am

Realistically I dont gain perks and level up
Realistically weapons dont actually score critical hits
out of a more realistic standpoint of weaponry physics and anatomy, skyrim doesn't exist
I guess thats why its a game

I can score a critical hit with an axe in real life. As I stated above, what if it cuts through flesh and fractures or shatters your bone. We aren't arguing, we're discussing why the attributes are oddly reversed.