That was kind of silly - it's a good thing they switched this around to 1-handed axes and 2-handed axes for Skyrim.

The opposite end of an axe is rarely a stick. You're thinking of a hatchet. Most axes have either spikes a metal slab or another blade. Never a stick...

I like blades the most. I think they should change the blade skill to bladed to include axes or just include axes , it doesn't matter to me i still use axes to especially now because they have the deep cut perk to make people bleed out.

I know right? I like to have art on my melee weapons. If im going to kill someone up close I want style. ANd to be pretty blunt about it. blades are nice and all but axes have more versatility than most weapons. also hammers.

I have 2 combat oriented axes in my shelf. One has blades on the pommel the other is like a small flanged mace..

Also axes have a high chance of fracturing bone, as well as knocking an opponent off his feet. Characteristics more befitting to a blunt weapon. I completely agree with Bethesda's classification

I guess swords look cooler, and the way how you pull them out of a scabbard/sheath is cool too. I think the real problem with blunt weapons has been that they haven't worked anyway different - they've only looked different. This time the weapons have different perks, and different kill animations. Also the skills are now divided so that you'll try both. This should make blunt weapons more popular. Bashing in skulls with a warhammer might really be awesome this time.

I can't vote because I'm not biased towards either of them. It depends on the character.

In most RPGs the blade weapons are more varied and generally better choice of weapon for us to take.

This resulted in our mostly preferring the Blade over Blunt weapon.

But now in Skyrim, each type of weapon, Blades, Blunts and Axes have their own perk branches, and are as good a choice as any other group, so I'm really interested in them and like to test all those types in different characters, but my first one would probably a mostly ranged weapon type, with stealth dagger kills as backup.

Swords look cooler.

And they have range mixed with speed, which I prefer to the "brute force" approach of blunt.

I would like to just take a minute to point out something you have completely missed.

The business end of an axe has both a sharp bit and a blunt bit.

Regardless of that, the axe is the same length whichever way you hold it, your arm is the same length whichever way you are holding the axe, and your muscles are the same size whichever way you are holding your arm. Therefore, it doesn't matter whether you hold it from the handle or the business end, or which side of the business end you hit someone with, it will have provide the same torque and hence EXACTLY the same lever action as it would otherwise.

Now then, on to pressure. If you hit someone with the sharp bit, then they will experience a force on their arm which, due to the small surface area over which that force is applied, will mean they experience a large amount of pressure. Possibly their skin will break.

As the force you can apply is absolutely constant, if you hit them with the blunt end with larger surface area they will experience less pressure, and so their skin is not as likely to break as if they had been hit by the axe head. They are unlikely to really care about that, however, because exactly the same amount of force has just been applied to them. The sharp part of the axe head doesn't hit harder than the blunt bit at all, it just applies the same force in a smaller area.

Did you just say what I was saying but all smart and [censored]?

Bladed weapons should work fine for skeletons - especially straight swords which are more suited for hacking cuts anyway. As for "stone solid" monsters, the weapon of my choice would be magic. Standard blunt weapons aren't made for this kind of target either. What blunt weapons are good for is heavily armoured opponents, because they can deform the armour and what's inside. If the inside volume of your suit of plate is smaller than your regular body volume, you have a problem... Likewise, with medium armour, a suit of chain will do little to stop blunt force, though you usually have some kind of padding underneath or on top.

There's some romanticized greatness attached to swords I just love, so I'm definitely a blades guy. Blunt weapons strike me as barbaric and lacking the elegance of blades, but if I had to use one, it would be a mace.

...which of course is key to the question whether not just your skin but also your bones will break. And the difference between having and not having a hand is pretty criticial in battle, though of course it isn't simulated in TES...

I don't prefer blunt or blade, I use my hands.

You think a long thin blade would be more effective against a brittle skeleton then a heavy hammer?

Go grab some glass and break it with a knife...now try a hammer.

Yeah I was inbefored. When I began, his post was last on the page. It took longer to write...

Nope. All you said was the opposite end of the axe was rarely a stick. I was hitting the same lever action part of his post.

By the way... Our hatchet downstairs has a fairly solid metal butt. Pretty much every kind of axe has a butt, a sharp spike or another axe head, because if there was just the same material that the handle was made out of then the axe would essentially be a knife. I believe by stick, he meant that you were hitting them with the actual handle of the axe.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blunt_trauma

Technically, and you'll know this if you've ever handled an axe, an axe delivers blunt force trauma. It only needs to penetrate a little into a block of wood to split the entire thing in two. It is, in fact, possible to split a large piece of wood into two smaller pieces of wood using a hammer. (Or, as it happened, split the chopping block into two smaller pieces of chopping block by hitting a piece of wood with an axe. I managed to split the block, not the bit of wood. Skills, or what?)

Your mistake is to believe that a sword is like a large knife. It isn't.

Oh, and by the way: I've handled swords. Including sharp ones. The ironic thing, though, is that it doesn't even need to be sharp to cut through bone.

Hint: Swords were MADE to sever limbs.

http://youtu.be/ZR9k23U-P10

I usually play magic orientated characters, but when it comes to melee, I like a mace. Especially a spiked mace, or "morning star" as they are called. They just look much more ruthless than a sword. Swords shouldnt be that effective against enemies in heavy armor, since they lack the power, but a mace can cause huge dents in even the thickest armors. I see swords as better used against light armor.

I cant see hunting a dragon with an arming sword (the longest one-handed medivel sword, basically TES's longsword) I want something with killing power, a huge axe, a GIANT hammer, or better yet, a nice halbred or something. Bows and friggin lighting bolts work fine, but I can't see a one-handed weapon doing jack to a big beastie like a dragon or a wooly mammoth. And so, blunt gets my vote, as blunt 2hws are better than big swords IMHO.

Swords are ment for piercing and slicing flesh other then a katana or claymore few could cut limbs as easily as you claim.

Plus unless the skeletons isn't armed. cleaving it would be harder then you think. Much easier to bring down something heavy on it's skull shattering itl. One clean blow that takes far less force.

On topic now: My personal preference of using swords is because the word for uaginae comes from the latin word vag?na, which means sheath. Or scabbard. So that leads to the use of sword as slang to mean the same as a male rooster/[censored] (four letter word, begins with c, rhymes with rock)

cLock?

FOUR letter word?

My virgin eyes!!!