This is probably decisive all of the long two handed weapons are slower than this (there are some exceptions, tridents, spears and bo sticks are all long but not quite as slow, but these are liminal I think). The battle axe is 4’ long, no longer than a morning star or flail, and its weapon speed factor is 7. Alternately a lucern hammer requires its length in space to swing, suggesting you are holding the shaft one hand right near the bottom the other about Â¼ up. Take the Lochaber axe above, it is 7’+ long but only requires 2’ space to use, this suggests you put your hands at the 1/3 and 2/3 marks on the shaft so only about 2-3’ is needed for the swing. Take the pole arms, you can either stab someone with one, which doesn’t need too much space in front of you, as you can pull the weapon back before thrusting, or you can swing it at them, which requires a good amount of space. This is interesting, as many associate needing two hands for the weapon with its weight, whereas this suggests that it is the unwieldiness of the weapon that matters. It appears that weight, damage and space required do not correlate well with two handed wielding, but length does, and weapon speed factor does. Much heavier, a bit longer, but the main difference is speed factor, higher for both. Now look at two other 'axes' on the list, both pole arms and 2 handed weapons: Much heavier than a battle axe, with similar length/space/speed dimensions, but the morning star is a 1 handed weapon. How about weight, the lucern was 150gp, what about a morning star? Heavy and long, and slow compared to battle axe.

Now a 'control', something we know to be a case of a two handed weapon, definitely a pole arm, the lucern hammer. Obvious first comparison is the hand axe:Ĭlose in weight but far off in terms of weapon speed, length, etc.

Ulan has a 1 hour subway ride to kill, so here I go!

One handed battle axe