Axe beating Lance question

[Scarface]

So how exactly does an axe beat a lance in a fight?

[Anacybele]

Well, I believe that axes can easily block a lance's blade due to the large size of its own. Also, a lance's shaft could probably easily be chopped in two by an axe.

[Rehab]

Pure guessing here, just like how I imagine a sword might beat an axe, but:

An axe's significant weight might be enough to swat an average polearm aside such that the former would be able to blow through the latter's defensive stance, and it might be easier to block a lance thrust with an axe's big fat edge than it'd be to parry or block in the same way using a sword. A skillful axe strike might also just be able to cleave through the polearms shaft. (/massive speculation)

edit: Dangit dude I knew I was being too slow to be the first response

As far as why we have the triangle relationship in gameplay, I imagine it's at least in part to try to give users of every melee weapon type both a role and a weakness- use axe units when up against lance units, use lances against swords etc.

More guessing/imagination on my part, but I kinda think of each melee weapon type as something like a weight class, going like sword=>light, lance=>middleweight, axe=>heavy. I forget the name, but I remember this game which was on at least Gamecube that was kind of a surprising amount like Fire Emblem in its gameplay, a turn-based grid strategy rpg about gladiators and shit IIRC. The game also had a rock-paper-scissors system, where lights beat heavies (so much faster heavies couldn't hit them), mids beat lights (stronger than lights and could actually hit them), and heavies beat mids (same reason mids beat lights). The classes and characters don't always match up exactly, but I think the weapon setup in FE works similarly enough that they remind me of each other.

I wish I could remember that game's name

Edited February 6, 2013 by Rehab

[Doga]

I always thought that the axe could be used to hook something as big and slender as a polearm.

[Kramy]

I see it as an axe can shop a lance in half... though that probably would only work on a lance with a wooden handle

[Anacybele]

I see it as an axe can shop a lance in half... though that probably would only work on a lance with a wooden handle

No, some metals can be cut by a blade too. Not all though, I reckon.

[Rehab]

I always thought that the axe could be used to hook something as big and slender as a polearm.

I forgot about that in posting but yeah, that's another thing I assumed would help.

[Narga_Rocks]

More guessing/imagination on my part, but I kinda think of each melee weapon type as something like a weight class, going like sword=>light, lance=>middleweight, axe=>heavy. I forget the name, but I remember this game which was on at least Gamecube that was kind of a surprising amount like Fire Emblem in its gameplay, a turn-based grid strategy rpg about gladiators and shit IIRC. The game also had a rock-paper-scissors system, where lights beat heavies (so much faster heavies couldn't hit them), mids beat lights (stronger than lights and could actually hit them), and heavies beat mids (same reason mids beat lights). The classes and characters don't always match up exactly, but I think the weapon setup in FE works similarly enough that they remind me of each other.

I wish I could remember that game's name

Gladius. One of my gamecube faves and always wished for a sequel.

[Byte2222]

I always thought that the axe could be used to hook something as big and slender as a polearm.

This seems most likely: most axes seen in FE could be described as bearded axes and such a weapon could potentially give its user a major advantage over a spearfighter. A bearded axe could hook a polearm, immobilising it for long enough for the axefighter to close the distance to the spearfighter. When a spearman has an enemy closer than the tip of his spear, the weapon's effectively useless and hence, axes beat lances.

No, some metals can be cut by a blade too. Not all though, I reckon.

A sword can cut a sword. That's why you'll never see a (competent) swordsman block a strike, they'll parry or redirect it. The spear is much the same and you can still use it to parry attacks effectively.

Oh, and I do have first-hand experience of weapon arts but by all means, lets discuss this.

[Faye]

Axes strong against lances, and lances strong against swords; I get both of these. The one I don't understand is why swords are effective against axes. In my head, I explained it as sword-wielders generally being faster and lighter then a heavy and slow axe wielder, and to quote Firefly: "you don't need strength as much as you need speed". Eh, but what the heck do I know? 8D;

[VaikeTime]

I always thought it was that the small size of their weapon meant Axemen could easily duck/avoid the attacks of the lances. But the hooking thins sounds much more plausible.

[Knight]

I always thought hooking a spear with an axe is how it would work, and if fencing has taught me anything, it's that reach is a very dangerous attribute, which is why I assume lances beat swords, and swords beat axes. Even though a lance is longer than an axe, an axe can grip the shaft, unlike most swords, which would could be used to disarm and destroy.

[CT075]

A sword can cut a sword. That's why you'll never see a (competent) swordsman block a strike, they'll parry or redirect it.

while i don't actually disagree with you if this were some set-in-stone fact there would be way less sword remains found with evidence of blade-to-blade blocking

[Knight]

while i don't actually disagree with you if this were some set-in-stone fact there would be way less sword remains found with evidence of blade-to-blade blocking

While I was in my fencing class, one guy snapped another man's foil in half, and those things are much more durable than their flexibility would have you believe. But I would assume it would be different for a thicker blade.

[shadowofchaos]

The first thing that comes to mind with the posts on swords breaking swords is the Mythbusters episode with the Princess Bride rapier... or something.

It was busted in that it was the force of the recoil from it bending that actually broke it.

But that's just what I remember offhand.

[Firespark Faerie]

Interesting. I never gave much thought to the weapon triangle other than it being a rock-paper-scissors dynamic to add more strategic elements to the game. This should be fun to philosophize on!

Despite how common they are in RPGs, swords (though depending on the type of blade and where it's from) generally require finesse and technique to weld properly. Even the heavier types like broadswords have special fighting moves developed to maximize the force put into them.

Axes are a much simpler, more ancient weapon (they were originally made from stone) reliant more on force than skill, notable exceptions being hand axes and other types made for throwing. The power behind an axe comes from the weight opposite the bladed side with which you strike the opponent, resulting in a deep wound. Axes are also of course very wide, so they could be used for blocking weapons with small tips like lances with ease. However, a skilled swordsman could possibly weave his or her blade around the axe and land a hit, while the long sticks of lances are harder to maneuver.

Spears and lances predate swords as well, their tips also being made from stone before metal refining and working techniques were developed. Originally made for hunting, these weapons were designed to have a long reach, so the hunter could keep a safe distance from an animal's horns, claws, etc. They were later redeveloped for warfare, during which designs became more varied. The term 'lance' usually applies only to weapons that are held and charged with, sometimes on horseback, while 'spear' refers to lighter variants that can be thrown as well as held. Back on topic, these could easily be used to fend off an enemy with a sword for much the same reason early hunters used them- they could jab a sharp point into their opponent while staying out of their reach.

[sunshineYON]

Sword > Axe and Lance > Sword always made sense. This is a question that I never got the answer to as well. Swords are much faster and lighter than axes allowing the sword wielder to dance around the axeman. Lances are longer than swords and can get a first strike in before the sword wielder can close in. Though if a sword wielder get into a lance wielder's space, than its all over. The whole thing is just to balance things out, it doesn't need to make much sense. Think Pokemon type advantages, some of them are just plain nonsensical.

[Knight]

Sword > Axe and Lance > Sword always made sense. This is a question that I never got the answer to as well. Swords are much faster and lighter than axes allowing the sword wielder to dance around the axeman. Lances are longer than swords and can get a first strike in before the sword wielder can close in. Though if a sword wielder get into a lance wielder's space, than its all over. The whole thing is just to balance things out, it doesn't need to make much sense. Think Pokemon type advantages, some of them are just plain nonsensical.

Whether or not a weapon is lighter is irrelevant, as the plate armour that knights wore didn't allow room for agility and speed. An axe is just as, if not more useful than a sword in medieval and early renaissance combat, as swords could not easily penetrate plate. But because most axes weren't double edged like swords, and a sword had greater range than anything but a halberd or poleaxe, the sword has the advantage their. The lance issue however, a sword is only better than a lance under the circumstances that the opponent allows the swordsman to approach, but that's unlikely seeing as a pike is anywhere from 5-10 feet, and a lance can be even longer. And again, a thrust from a lance could pierce plate better than a sword.

[Rewjeo]

A sword can cut a sword. That's why you'll never see a (competent) swordsman block a strike, they'll parry or redirect it. The spear is much the same and you can still use it to parry attacks effectively.

Oh, and I do have first-hand experience of weapon arts but by all means, lets discuss this.

Technically it's not *cutting,* but simply snapping the blade. Any metal that's soft enough to be cut would be too soft to make an effective weapon. Also, there are certain soft metals that have a tendency to burst into flame in the presence of water or even plain old oxygen... I personally would avoid using a cesium sword at all costs. Francium, too, I suppose, except that doesn't really exist.

[Byte2222]

Technically it's not *cutting,* but simply snapping the blade. Any metal that's soft enough to be cut would be too soft to make an effective weapon. Also, there are certain soft metals that have a tendency to burst into flame in the presence of water or even plain old oxygen... I personally would avoid using a cesium sword at all costs. Francium, too, I suppose, except that doesn't really exist.

I think you can appreciate, though, that the sword is still broken and it's wielder is still probably dead. My point is that if a sword takes the full force of an attack there is a serious risk of it breaking, at which point its user is as good as dead. All the swordsmanship I've learned has told me to deflect, not block, and that's what I'm trying to say here.

Whether or not a weapon is lighter is irrelevant, as the plate armour that knights wore didn't allow room for agility and speed. An axe is just as, if not more useful than a sword in medieval and early renaissance combat, as swords could not easily penetrate plate. But because most axes weren't double edged like swords, and a sword had greater range than anything but a halberd or poleaxe, the sword has the advantage their. The lance issue however, a sword is only better than a lance under the circumstances that the opponent allows the swordsman to approach, but that's unlikely seeing as a pike is anywhere from 5-10 feet, and a lance can be even longer. And again, a thrust from a lance could pierce plate better than a sword.

There are several things I want to dispute here. Firstly, armour wasn't that heavy. Secondly, the sword's main trait as a weapon (to my understanding, anyway) is that it's direct and, quite literally, to-the-point. It's also the lightest and easiest to wield (for a single user) of the weapons in FE. With this in mind, I argue that swords' advantage over axes is that a sword user would be better trained and equipped to deflect the powerful axe blows. Bear in mind that whatever explanation has to stand up for Sword Knight vs. Fighter as well as Myrmidon vs. Fighter.

Thirdly: lances, spears, pikes, halberds/poleaxes. You mentioned almost all of these, they might all fall under FE's 'lances' category and they're all different but in FE you only see one regularly and two more occasionally. A lance is large, designed to be used from horseback for your main charge and, when the tip breaks off inside your enemy, you change to another weapon. FE9's Knight Killer and FE10's Horseslayer are these and they're too large and heavy to use in single combat. A pike is exceptionally long, designed as an anti-cavalry weapon to be used by formation infantry: it's far too long to be used by a lone combatant. A halberd is a kind of poleaxe and was fairly popular for its versatility, but was never (to my knowledge) used by single combatants. 'Spear' is a fairly broad term but tends to be used for shorter polearms, occasionally with a blade on the end instead of just a point. The spear is the only one of these I've heard of being used for a single fighter, in fact, I've done some spear training myself. Spears tend to be moderately light but are very hard to use in single combat and are more complicated, multi-faceted weapons. The spear's key point is its reach (as is widely accepted) meaning that any fighter with a shorter reach has to get past the spearman's ideal distance before they can even scratch them but at that point the spearman's nearly dead. A compelling argument for 'lances' having an advantage over swords, if you ask me. Don't forget that this is just an advantage, you can still win when on the wrong side of the weapon triangle.

tl;dr version: you're really talking about spears. Spears are light enough for single combat and have a long reach which implies an advantage over swords.

For reference, I studied Aikido for 2 years and spent some of that time learning traditional Japanese weapon art with the Katana and Yari (short spear), or at least safer, wooden facsimiles of these weapons. I'm also an expert archer but that's unrelated.

Edited February 21, 2013 by Byte2222

[Darros]

I thought they just wanted more consistency to the weapon triangle. Swords would be > axes, and the rest would logically follow. I'm assuming that's where IS started anyway. Swords > Axes just on it's own doesn't really work.