UESP Forums

Yes I know what weve seen is not final, but assuming it IS final...Why do greatswords get a critical chance upgrade, yet great-axes get a bleed upgrade? Last I checked swords were the "bleedy bleedy slashy slashy" and axes were the "crity crity hacky hacky"

Last time I checked, getting chopped by an axe made you bleed. I could be wrong though...

I guess the greatsword would do more precise slashes and thereby hitting vital parts more often, while a great axe is more... Well I don't know..

Axes are for chopping. Chopping tends to lead to a lot of bleeding.

Swords slice, which causes cuts, which causes bleeding. Axes are for hacking...If you swung a sword at someones head (vertical) it would most likely cause them to bleed, with an axe it would completely kill them..Theres a reason you dont cut down trees with a sword. Trees dont bleed...unless theyre maple.

Because there has to be a gameplay difference between swords and axes to justify the separation.

Well, to put some of this in perspective, watch Vlad the Impaler vs Ghengis Khan (or Sun Tzu, not sure which) in Deadliest Warrior.

Vlad's weapon of choice, the Kilji, basically obliterated the torso of the opponent. The Kilji is pretty much a very heavy sword/cleaver. So with that weapon in mind, both sides of this conversation are correct! I think the game needs a Kilji, so that we can hack AND slice our way through victims.

Frogmander wrote: Trees dont bleed...unless theyre maple.

Mmmmm, I wish we had maple trees. Damn Australia! (Not a 100% damn, more of a 45%)

As for the perks... it's a hard one to work out... I'm on the fence.

Frogmander wrote: Trees dont bleed...unless theyre maple.

Maples also demand their equal rights from the Oak trees.

Reference - Rush: "The Trees"

I dont see it as odd, axe will make you bleed a lot more, while swords are more for going for organs

Maybe stun, or stagger would be better for axe. Then again they could have that for blunts, maces and hammers.

Still, you take a hit from an axe or a sword to the neck, both are going to cause a lot of bleeding.
It's one of those issues that can go a variety of ways....

Ahhh, I'm staying on the fence.

dorian2 wrote:

Frogmander wrote: Trees dont bleed...unless theyre maple.

Maples also demand their equal rights from the Oak trees.

Reference - Rush: "The Trees"

For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas...


Instant respect for the Rush quote.

Perhaps applying Crit Hit to an Axe & Bleeding Wounds to a Sword made them a little overpowered, and the switcharound is to nerf the weapons a tiny bit.

The way I see it:

You can't stab someone with an axe(well, not easily or efficiently anyway) but you can hack at them a lot with a lot of effect... multiple deep gashes are going to cause a lot of blood to leave the body over time. Swords can pierce organs and this will therefore cripple someone almost immediately, causing lots of damage really quickly. I doubt you can Crit someone on every strike, so it's more like you only manage to stab them now and then, and normally only cause a few painful wounds on the surface. I would think the bleeding perk acts a lot like a lethal poison you get in most games where it drains health for a few seconds on each hit.

Just my thoughts though, I could obviously be thinking about this in the completely wrong way.

Axes are for hacking as I have said, axes are blunt, as you can tell in oblivion (And they arent exactly sharp IRL either), they are used as putting a lot of weight into the strike, and crushing the bone, but also cutting like a sword. Its basically a mix of a sword and a mace. Maces I would say, as said earlier, should be "stun" or "stagger" effect, though swords are for the cutting. When people are depressed they dont cut their wrists with an axe do they? .-. No, they dont, they cut them with a knife (which is for all purposes a short short sword) as it will cut easily and cause massive bleeding. An axe they would have to swing down and would most likely end up chopping their entire hand off. Not just cause a slash and bleed. Not to mention every other fantasy game I have played it is usually axes = crit. Maces = stun. and Swords = Bleeds.

But this is not evrey other fantsay game, also I dont call axe blunt

Wolfie wrote:But this is not evrey other fantsay game, also I dont call axe blunt

Is it whether you call it blunt? Or Bethesda?

form my understanding its defreint fomr blunt no?
dont they have axe and then blunt or is axe just a sub part of blunt again?
(and in that case dose it mater if we thik axe should do somehting or if beth dose?)

Run your finger along a sword, run your finger along an axe. The sword will most likely cut you, the axe will most likely not. If anything a sharp axe would be less effective, less crushing power.

Umm you do know that axes are sharp right? they ahve to be to do what they.. where made to do

Honestly the perks make sense to me.

When two guys fight with swords thay block, parry and dodge each others blows because generally the first real hit is the winner. Small cuts from a sword are not debilitating but you can't carry on with a sword in the stomach.
With axes there's less finesse. You just hit at your opponent as much as you can because you know every hit is going to cause significant injury.
So Swords with Critical Chance and Axes with Bleed makes sense to me

Just my opnion though.

i think i read somewhere that swords do have a small bleed effect chance, but the perk for the axes gives them a much higher chance and/or residual damage, im pretty sure it was said a while back that they both have bleed effects, axes just get a better bleed effect because of the "mangle" factor, sharp weapon with lots of force behind it causes more damage, swords slice, hammers slam, axes SPLIT they cause gaping wounds

Frogmander wrote:Axes are for hacking as I have said, axes are blunt, as you can tell in oblivion (And they arent exactly sharp IRL either), they are used as putting a lot of weight into the strike, and crushing the bone, but also cutting like a sword. Its basically a mix of a sword and a mace. Maces I would say, as said earlier, should be "stun" or "stagger" effect, though swords are for the cutting. When people are depressed they dont cut their wrists with an axe do they? .-. No, they dont, they cut them with a knife (which is for all purposes a short short sword) as it will cut easily and cause massive bleeding. An axe they would have to swing down and would most likely end up chopping their entire hand off. Not just cause a slash and bleed. Not to mention every other fantasy game I have played it is usually axes = crit. Maces = stun. and Swords = Bleeds.

Okay, now you're just wanting to argue with someone. I've read this entire thread, and you just have to be right don't you ?

RohanWarden wrote:Honestly the perks make sense to me.

When two guys fight with swords thay block, parry and dodge each others blows because generally the first real hit is the winner. Small cuts from a sword are not debilitating but you can't carry on with a sword in the stomach.
With axes there's less finesse. You just hit at your opponent as much as you can because you know every hit is going to cause significant injury.
So Swords with Critical Chance and Axes with Bleed makes sense to me

Just my opnion though.

This is just common sense. I suggest looking some stuff up on Wiki, or reading a book on medieval weaponry.

The way I see it is with a sword you are stabbing for a vital organ. An ax is chopping and is going to lead to more bleeding.

The only swords that are really designed for "stabbing" are rapiers and the like.

Most swords, particularly the "medieval European" ones that feature highly in Western RPG games, are built to smash bones: concentrating the force of the blow on a small area to maximise the damage, but not to cut or stab.

Eastern swords, like katana, are built with a finer edge and can be used to slice, offering a handy "laceration" alternative to combat.

Axes are thus very like swords from a Western RPG aspect.