One-handed Axes?

[Verrain]

I was burning up a dwarf today and went to the back of the Burning Wheel book to look up the Axe stats and noted that every Axe had the Two-Handed symbol next to it. Yet, I know there must be one handed axes for every lifepath of a Dwarven warrior offers Shield training which would be pointless if Dwarves only used two handed weapons.

To make things more confusing the sample dwarves in the book have Axes with the identical stats to the two handed axes in the back yet have shields.

So, are there stats for one handed axes? Can you use shields with two handed weapons? Are weapons marked two-handed optionally two handed and if so is there a difference in the weapon when used with one hand or two?

Many thanks for any insight.

[Drozdal]

Use sword stats for one handed axes.
I do not think that you could use full stats of t/h axe while weilding shield in your other hand.

[luke]

look, the new Weapons Appendix (http://www.burningwheel.org/pdf/bwrev_weaponsappendix.pdf)

-L

[tetsujin28]

NB that the footnote for 'beaks' is mislabled as '4'; it should be '3'.

T28, the former game editor :)

[Verrain]

look, the new Weapons Appendix (http://www.burningwheel.org/pdf/bwrev_weaponsappendix.pdf)

-L

Thankee. That leaves only one question. What would be the stats for a superior quality short axe? Following the pattern of the Two-Handed Axe I would presume you simply up the VA by 1.

[luke]

sounds good to me. no more space on the page, though.

Notice that reg-u-lar old swords no longer get VA. You've got to do a Thrust aka Great Strike in order to get the VA with them. Too much reading of the historical sort.

:(
;)

-L

[Verrain]

So long as there is a place where game balance and reality meet, I say go for it. I look forward to seeing the revision in toto instead of in tantalizing glimpses. :)

[Yagathai]

<bitter-grave-digger>

*has apopletic fit*

*dies with a curse on abzu's head on his lips*

</bitter-grave-digger>

[Thor]

sounds good to me. no more space on the page, though.

Notice that reg-u-lar old swords no longer get VA. You've got to do a Thrust aka Great Strike in order to get the VA with them. Too much reading of the historical sort.


Nice. I like it. Now Hammers and Maces get their due for what they were designed for: ruining the day of a guy in armor.

[tetsujin28]

Notice that reg-u-lar old swords no longer get VA. You've got to do a Thrust aka Great Strike in order to get the VA with them. Too much reading of the historical sort.-LI like that. It didn't make much sense to me that leather was completely useless against swords.

[luke]

double whammy: Leather's protective quality has been improved, too. Now cheap armor is totally worth it.

-L

[tetsujin28]

Now if only I could get my head wrapped around the new armour rules... 8)

[luke]

::asks tetsujin to sit down::
::places bascinet (4D armor) on tetsujin's head::
::gently tilt's tetsujin's chin up so he strikes a noble pose::
::picks up baseball bat leaning against wall::
::measures a swing::
::let's fly::
::KRANG!::

::the helmet provides four dice for the test (DN 4, since it's mundane)::
::base obstacle for armor tests is 1::
::bat has no VA, therefore it does not raise the armor obstacle::
::helmet gets one success and therefore protects tetsujin from harm::

::leans over, straightens up tetsujin::
::adjusts helmet, lifts chin::
::picks up a flanged mace::
::measures a swing::
::tetsujin ducks and raises his hands::
::reassures him that it's only a test::
::measures swing again::
::let's fly::
::wham::
::uh oh::

::the helmet provides four dice of armor protection::
::the base obstacle is 1::
::the mace has a VA 2, it therefore increases the armor obstacle by two::
::armor test of four dice vs Ob 3::
::armor gets two successes::

::apologizes to tetsujin's mom::
::tries to explain to police::
::visits tetsujin in ICU::
::gets on talk show::
::turns out that Jerry Springer's a nice guy, who knew?::
::converts to 'roleplaying games are evil' crowd::

-L
:twisted:

[jc_madden]

Was this change to keep the core mechanic constant? IE could one consider mundane armor to have Black Dice?

[luke]

Was this change to keep the core mechanic constant? IE could one consider mundane armor to have Black Dice?

yes

[jc_madden]

i are the smartest

[tetsujin28]

My head hurts.

[Thor]

My head hurts.

So easy tesujin28! :P

I know Abzu already tried to explain it, but I'll take a stab at it.

All armor is now Black shade, or, rarely, Gray shade (probably the only starting characters that will have Gray shade armor are dwarves that purchase dwarven mail). Heaven forbid that a GM allow White shade armor into the game! :shock:

So, almost everyone will be rolling their armor dice against a DN of 4 (black shade). You roll a number of dice depending on what type of armor you have. As a bit of additional complication, the torso area is considered to be more heavily protected than the rest, so it gets an additional die.

For instance, chainmail gives you B4 armor. But the chest (the default striking location) is more heavily armored and gets B5 armor.

Normally, you only need one success to ward off a blow completely. However, if your opponent is using a weapon with VA (for instance, an Axe has VA 2), your obstacle on the armor test is raised by the VA.

So, two examples:
Lets say your character is wearing a full suit of chainmail. My character is irritable and strikes you with his Run of the Mill knife (no VA). No matter how many successes I rolled to stab you, you roll your B5 armor (5 dice at DN 4), and need just ONE success to ward off the blow. Pretty simple, right? A B5 roll against Ob 1 is not very hard. In fact, according to my Monster Burner, B5 dice against Ob 1 means you have a better than 9 in 10 chance of succeeding.

Now let's say you're still in a full suit of chainmail, but my irritable character hits you with his axe (VA 2). You still get your B5 armor roll (5 dice at DN 4, remember?), but this time it's far more serious. The axe's VA increases your Obstacle by 2. Instead of one measily success on 5 black dice, you now need 3 successes! This gets very iffy. According to my Monster Burner, you have only a 50-50 chance of coming up with 3 successes on B5 dice. Still, you get those 3 successes and you just laugh off my blow. On the other hand, get only two successes and you fail! I do full damage to you.

Does that help?

[Kublai]

The coolest part is that you can now spend Artha freely on your armor. Spend enough and you can epiphany your armor or some other cool effect!

[Yagathai]

<BGD> You see? You see what confusion the wholesale (and wholly unnecessary) changes in the armor system endengers?!

Fools.</BGD>

[foxandwarlock]

WHAT?

All my dedicated posting in the forums and the kukri didn't make the weapons list? :twisted:

That's it. I'm out of here.

*packs up Kukri and goes home*

[Thor]

WHAT?

All my dedicated posting in the forums and the kukri didn't make the weapons list? :twisted:

That's it. I'm out of here.

*packs up Kukri and goes home*

Heh! It's still basically a dirk that goes slashy-slashy instead of stabby-stabby.

If that isn't enough for you, try something like this:
Kukri Power 2, Add 2, Slow, VA - , Shortest

[foxandwarlock]

What's the "Shortest" bit? Is that a Trait for the weapon? To signify that it can operate on the inside without penalty? Something new from the revision?

[Kublai]

Tantalizing, ain't it?

[Yagathai]

A kurki is, essentially, a hatchet with some funny balance. Like an axe, it concentrates all of its striking power on the leading edge, which is offset from the plane of the wielder's hand. The only thing it has over a regular right-angle axe is that the striking edge is a little bit curved, and thus benefits from vigorous wrist motion more. Also, you can use the inside edge, which a hatchet lacks.

[Thor]

Tantalizing, ain't it?

It sure is! I can't wait until they see it all! As a little hint, it IS something from the Revision, and it ties into the new Positioning system that throws out those nasty-nasty paces!

[Thor]

A kurki is, essentially, a hatchet with some funny balance. Like an axe, it concentrates all of its striking power on the leading edge, which is offset from the plane of the wielder's hand. The only thing it has over a regular right-angle axe is that the striking edge is a little bit curved, and thus benefits from vigorous wrist motion more. Also, you can use the inside edge, which a hatchet lacks.

Yep. The stats I gave are a small sword under the new weapons stats, except Shortest rather than Short. The only difference is that a hatchet gets Power 3 rather than Power 2. But since a kukri uses the wrist while a hatchet uses a wider arm motion, I went for the slightly reduced Power.

Neither the hatchet, small sword, nor sword get VA under the new weapons stats, so the Kukri doesn't get it either. Besides, it was designed for hacking off ears, noses and hands, not through armor.

The larger, sword-length ones would probably get Axe stats. But my understanding is that they were largely ceremonial.

[Kublai]

Regarding Shortest... wouldn't an unarmed strike be "shortest?"

[Thor]

Regarding Shortest... wouldn't an unarmed strike be "shortest?"

Crack your whip on Abzu! http://www.burningwheel.org/pdf/bwrev_weaponsappendix.pdf

[Kublai]

look, the new Weapons Appendix (http://www.burningwheel.org/pdf/bwrev_weaponsappendix.pdf)

Your footnotes are off. :?

I am also glad to see that the mace remains the most powerful weapon in the game.

Also, how can you justify a club and a staff as being the same length? :shock:

[Thor]

I am also glad to see that the mace remains the most powerful weapon in the game.

Technically, Poleaxes, Hammers, Axes and Swords are more "Powerful" :lol:

But yeah, the mace has the most VA, which is good. That's what it was designed to do!

[Kublai]

Power 2, VA 2 and Fast make it my personal choice! How are maces justified as being fast whereas a sword isn't?

[Thor]

Power 2, VA 2 and Fast make it my personal choice! How are maces justified as being fast whereas a sword isn't?

Fast has got to be a freakin' typo!

[Yagathai]

A large three-foot club has the same effective reach as a staff, I think, unless you're using the staff like a spear.

[Thor]

A large three-foot club has the same effective reach as a staff, I think, unless you're using the staff like a spear.

The new weapons appendix agrees with you, although I'll note that it depends. Most staff martial arts that I know of (and I'm sure there are plenty that I don't) actually have you holding a staff at one end. Check out the Indian martial art Silambam (sometimes Silambamboo) for instance.

[jc_madden]

That's the great thing about staves, you can adjust the grip and stance and effectively wield it as a single weapon with reach, a double weapon, or a parrying weapon. I did bit of weapon kata training when I took martial arts long long ago, and the Bo staff was always my favorite.

[tetsujin28]

I am also glad to see that the mace remains the most powerful weapon in the game.

Technically, Poleaxes, Hammers, Axes and Swords are more "Powerful" :lol:

But yeah, the mace has the most VA, which is good. That's what it was designed to do!I do think it's a little odd that there's no reason the Romans would have used the gladius (2/2/Fast/-/Short) over a mace (2/2/Fast/2/Short).

[tetsujin28]

look, the new Weapons Appendix (http://www.burningwheel.org/pdf/bwrev_weaponsappendix.pdf)

Your footnotes are off. :?NB that for some reason I'm encountering a bizarre printer error where the line for 'beaks' under Miscellaneous Weapon Gear doesn't print, just leaving a grey line. Weird.

[Viper]

I am also glad to see that the mace remains the most powerful weapon in the game.

Technically, Poleaxes, Hammers, Axes and Swords are more "Powerful" :lol:

But yeah, the mace has the most VA, which is good. That's what it was designed to do!I do think it's a little odd that there's no reason the Romans would have used the gladius (2/2/Fast/-/Short) over a mace (2/2/Fast/2/Short).

You have to remember that while armor did exist in Roman times, it was tinfoil compared to the type of armor your classic medieval knight wore. The mace was developed specifically as a means of defeating heavy armor like that. Also, the whole AD&D thing about clerics using maces because they are forbidden to spill blood has roots in reality too.

[Thor]

Also, the whole AD&D thing about clerics using maces because they are forbidden to spill blood has roots in reality too.

True. Fortunately, the prohibition didn't extend to crushing people's bones to powder, even when they were encased in heavy armor. Also, huge spikes on the mace were apparently fine.

There was an archbishop that led an English unit at Crecy, and he was supposed to be especially bloodthirsty. He enjoyed wading into battle with a massive spiked mace.

[Viper]

There was also the Baby Eating Bishop of Bath and Wells.

Oh wait, that was just a Black Adder episode. But a good idea nonetheless.

::gets to work burning the baby-eater trait::

[tetsujin28]

Power 2, VA 2 and Fast make it my personal choice! How are maces justified as being fast whereas a sword isn't?

Fast has got to be a freakin' typo!Maces were Fast in the old rules, too. Never seemed right, to me. P2 VA2 Slow makes sense.

[luke]

Have you ever seen a horseman's mace? They are tiny. There's almost nothing to them. A shaft and some flanges. It can strike with nearly any surface, and there's not a lot of material to be whipping around and repositioning.

However, if the consensus here is that the small mace should be Slow, that's fine with me. Perception's half the fight!


Perhaps we should start a poll?
-L

[Kublai]

Since when has Abzu ever cared what the masses think? :twisted:

[Thor]

Perhaps we should start a poll?

Sure. Based on nothing except my perception of combat, I think Fast should be the domain of stabbing/thrusting weapons for the most part. BTW, that raises a question I've been meaning to ask: does Small Sword in the Appendix denote a real Small Sword (the short, rapier-like weapon that became so popular at the end of the 17th century)? Or is it a "short sword" like a gladius?

Anyway, I could see a case for making the gladius fast. It was designed for real, up-close, nose-to-nose killing in a formation where there wasn't any room to swing.

By comparison, a horseman's mace, while light, was still a serious mass weapon that got a lot of power from the swing (and, of course, the horse).

And swords themselves were incredibly light.

According to historians Lilane and Fred Funcken: "the sword was, in fact, surprisingly light·.the average weight of swords from the 10th to the 15th centuries was 1.3 kg, while in the 16th century it was 0.9 kg. Even the heavier bastard swords which were used only by second-grade fighting men did not exceed 1.6 kg, while the horse swords known as 'hand-and-a-half' swords weighed 1.8 kg on average. When due allowances are made, these surprisingly low figures also hold good for the enormous two-hand sword, which was traditionally only wielded by 'true Hercules.' Yet it seldom weighed more than 3 kg."

Did a horseman's mace weigh much less than 1.3 kg?

[Yagathai]

Picture the horseman's mace as a metal billy club with flanges.

Does that make you feel any better?

[Thor]

Picture the horseman's mace as a metal billy club with flanges.

Does that make you feel any better?

Oh, I know exactly what they look like and what size they are...what with the massive permanent Medieval Arms and Armor exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of Art here in New York, not to mention the smaller exhibit at The Cloisters, no NYC nerd worth his salt should be ignorant.

I was looking for accurate weight information, since I don't have any armament books handy at work, and all searches for maces/mass weapons and medieval get you either D&D pages or SCA pages.

Regardless of how light they were, I think they still required a good swing. Sure, chainmail was utterly worthless against mass weapons and thrusting weapons, but as soon as the mace became big on the battlefield (I've seen numbers that suggest that about 80% of the chivalry carried them to war), you started seeing platemail on the battlefield to counteract it. Where chain was engineered to stop cutting attacks, plate (which was actually lighter than chain from what I understand) was engineered to distribute the force of a blow across a wider area.

Mass weapons were still the best weapon for taking down men in plate (for the most part), but you'd still need to take a good whack at 'em.

[Yagathai]

I see your point.

Your solution is simple! Remember 1st ed. D&D? Remember the armor class adjustment tables, where each weapon got its own special bonuses and penalties against each armor type/class?

Yeah! This concept greatly pleases the Bitter Grave Digger!

[Thor]

I see your point.

Your solution is simple! Remember 1st ed. D&D? Remember the armor class adjustment tables, where each weapon got its own special bonuses and penalties against each armor type/class?

Yeah! This concept greatly pleases the Bitter Grave Digger!

UGH! :cry:

I think that stuff is actually handled quite well by VA. I just think that if a weapon is something you need to "put your shoulder into" it should be Slow, not Fast.

[Kublai]

But I never thought the Mace listing pertained solely to a Horseman's Mace, but rather all types of maces and flails and morning stars. What about a Footman's mace? Surely those were Slow in our books, no?

[Yagathai]

A footman's mace: Slow. A one-ball flail: Suprisingly fast.

[Thor]

A footman's mace: Slow. A one-ball flail: Suprisingly fast.

eh. The 'threshing' part of the flail moves very quickly, yes. But I would say a flail is at best Slow and more likely Unwieldy, especially the chained variety. It's going to pull you out of alignment for the next blow. A hinged flail would probably be Slow though.

[Yagathai]

The thing with the the mace-and-chain is that yes, it pulls you off-balance if you miss. But if you hit, there's no need to follow-through with your blow as you would a mace or even a slashing sword. You're free to pull back and whang your opponent again in relatively short order.

[Kublai]

I feel that Fast Weapons are of the type that don't require much momentum to inflict damage: the stab of a dagger, the thrust of a rapier, the jab of a spear, a punch of the fist. If I can't strike with a weapon as quickly as I can with these, then they ought to be slow.

[Thor]

I feel that Fast Weapons are of the type that don't require much momentum to inflict damage: the stab of a dagger, the thrust of a rapier, the jab of a spear, a punch of the fist. If I can't strike with a weapon as quickly as I can with these, then they ought to be slow.

I agree completely.

[Kublai]

Also, I use Power to help my categorization, once again reasoning that momentum and weight add to Power. The higher Power a weapon has, the heavier and slower it would be.

A fist has no weight, is Fast, and has no Power.

A Hammer is heavy, is Unwieldy, and has a Power of 4.

There's definitely a connection there.

[luke]

But I never thought the Mace listing pertained solely to a Horseman's Mace, but rather all types of maces and flails and morning stars. What about a Footman's mace? Surely those were Slow in our books, no?

Those fall into the Great Mace category, are huge and terrifying and Slow.

-L

[Kublai]

Ah, see! Whenever I think Great Mace, I think of a giant 50 lb, two-handed monstrocity. With no historical knowledge of my own, and no description in the book, I can only rely on what I expect out of a fantasy setting.

So if the small mace is called a Horseman's mace and the normal mace is called a Great Mace, what would the giant two handed one be categorized as?

[Yagathai]

They had a bunch of different names, but weren't widely used. The... Belgians, I think, had a version that they called the gotentag. This fucker was nasty -- two handed, square-headed, with spikes. Punched through armor like tinfoil.

[luke]

Ah, see! Whenever I think Great Mace, I think of a giant 50 lb, two-handed monstrocity. With no historical knowledge of my own, and no description in the book, I can only rely on what I expect out of a fantasy setting.
I'm, um, uh, um...
:oops:



So if the small mace is called a Horseman's mace and the normal mace is called a Great Mace, what would the giant two handed one be categorized as?

Actually, they are Great Petes! I kid you not.
-L

[luke]

Ah, see! Whenever I think Great Mace, I think of a giant 50 lb, two-handed monstrocity. With no historical knowledge of my own, and no description in the book, I can only rely on what I expect out of a fantasy setting.
I'm, um, uh, um...
:oops:



So if the small mace is called a Horseman's mace and the normal mace is called a Great Mace, what would the giant two handed one be categorized as?

Actually, they are Great Petes! I kid you not.
-L

[Kublai]

Keep provoking me, dick. :evil: I make a fine point and you ridicule me in public.

I'll have my revenge.

[Yagathai]

I say you two settle this like gentlemen...

... in a CAGEMATCH!!!.

[RickoniX]

I say you two settle this like gentlemen...

... in a CAGEMATCH!!!.With Jell-o brand gelatin!

[Kublai]

And spiked bats!

[jc_madden]

screw that "locker room sword fight!" if you um, knowwotimean.....

[Viper]

You should settle the fight with maces.

[Thor]

You should settle the fight with maces.

I tell you what, someone take a horseman's mace, I'll take a spear. No armor. We'll see who's faster! :twisted:

[luke]

Keep provoking me, dick. :evil: I make a fine point and you ridicule me in public.

I'll have my revenge.

This from a man who tried to convince our friend who was moving to DC that Potomac was pronounced "pat-uh-mac" (say it like a leprechaun).

-L

[Kublai]

Nice Obfuscation but it didn't help your case at all. Your weak-ass argument is revealed. You've done nothing but Avoid and Obfuscate. No Point has been made. You've offered nothing to address my original Point.

[luke]

Nice Obfuscation but it didn't help your case at all. Your weak-ass argument is revealed. You've done nothing but Avoid and Obfuscate. No Point has been made. You've offered nothing to address my original Point.

What point? There are no big fantasy maces in BW. Jeebus, there's one type of sword, what makes you think I'm going to start pulling weapons out of Hawk the Slayer and sprinkling them in the game. (I don't even know if there's a big fantasy mace in Hawk the Slayer, but if there was one it'd be huge and spikey.)

Say no to final fantasy weapons,
-L

[jc_madden]

However historically there WAS a Chinese weapon.. god it's been ages I can't remember the name it's like Chun Zu or something, anyway it's a ~90 pound brass mace shaped like a man and wielded by his ankles.

[Kublai]

What point? There are no big fantasy maces in BW. Jeebus, there's one type of sword...

Ha! But there's two types of swords now - small sword and sword!

Rebuttal demolished! I win!

[Kevin]

Abzu wrote:

There are no big fantasy maces in BW. Jeebus, there's one type of sword, what makes you think I'm going to start pulling weapons out of Hawk the Slayer and sprinkling them in the game.

So does that mean no three-bladed sword (http://www.badmovies.org/movies/swordsorcerer/) in the Revision?

Damn. I'm not sure I want it anymore. :D

[Durgil]

...anyway it's a ~90 pound brass mace shaped like a man and wielded by his ankles.
I'm close to 300 lbs, 74" tall and I certainly can't imagine swinging something like that, and you say this thing was a Chinese weapon? I have to give that the big Bull Shit!

[jc_madden]

Dude, they had CHI powerz! You can call bullshit and make it red all you want I was just relating something I read because it was funny.

[Durgil]

Actually, I made it brown, and I was just joking around too.

[jc_madden]

Brown totally looks red to me. I knew you were joking, cos I was joking too.

[mike_ravenwood]

i was just wondering why the "Spiked Pommel" has VA and others like the actual sword doesn't. That seems a bit wierd that an short spike has more abblity to penetrate armor than a long sharp blade does.
I think about it this way, I pick up a DULL sword walk over to you, wind up, and nail you in the arm, your arm is now broken.
The blade still has a lot of inertia behind it and leather armor still has a chance to deflect the blade, but a sword can cut through bone, I think it will have a better chance than others to penetrate armor better than, say a FIST which, according to the new chart, the sword has the same VA as.
Sorry this is a little disjointed I am in need of sleep.

[luke]

Swords are slashing weapons. Light armor is better at deflecting this kind of attack. Sharp spikes are designed to puncture these kind of defenses.

Try it with an old leather jacket sometime. Slash at it a few times with a knife. The leather gets cut up, but it does absorb a lot of the impact. Now take an awl from your tool chest. Place the leather over a board or a cushion. Give it a sharp poke and the damn thing goes right through... and would continue through into your ribs.

Leastways, that's how I understand it.
-L

[mike_ravenwood]

knife obviously its got no VA, but lets attack said old leather jacket with a machette, hack hack hack, hope you didn't want to wear that again. :)
It's not so much that the spiked pommel has VA, more that the sword doesn't, but I more than willing to agree to disagree...


Mike

[luke]

knife obviously its got no VA, but lets attack said old leather jacket with a machette, hack hack hack, hope you didn't want to wear that again. :)
It's not so much that the spiked pommel has VA, more that the sword doesn't, but I more than willing to agree to disagree...


It seems counter-intuitive to me too, but ALL of the available evidence about medieval combat points to the sword as a dueling weapon, not a battle weapon. On the field, against heavily armored opponents, it was a weapon of last resort. The maces, axes, and polearms did the heavy work. Knives were used to finish a fallen foe. Though bows and artillery, probably accounted for the most casualties overall.

Anyway, swords just weren't the tool to use against armor. Spikes were fitted to weapons in order to give the wielder another option to puncture his opponent's defenses. You'll note the spike is a short weapon. It doesn't have the reach that your blade does. This will all become apparent and important once you see how we reworked movement.

-L

[mike_ravenwood]

oh I see how it is!! :D
Once there is cool new content that the masses haven't seen yet, you can't help but dangle that infront of us as often as possible. That makes be mad enought to only buy TWO copies, hah take that !!

believe me I have no illusions that I going to go hacking through steel encapsuled knights on horse back, just those leather clad men at arms.

[Durgil]

oh I see how it is!! :D
Once there is cool new content that the masses haven't seen yet, you can't help but dangle that infront of us as often as possible. That makes be mad enought to only buy TWO copies, hah take that !!
:!: Ditto :wink:

[eruditus]

::measures swing again::
::let's fly::
::wham::
::uh oh::


Who knew a discussion on game mechanics could be so instructional and FUNNY! This is one of the best bits I have ever seen.

:lol:

[eruditus]

That's the great thing about staves, you can adjust the grip and stance and effectively wield it as a single weapon with reach, a double weapon, or a parrying weapon. I did bit of weapon kata training when I took martial arts long long ago, and the Bo staff was always my favorite.

The newest MA I am designing for BW is a staff combat are that plays with these ideas.

[Thor]

The newest MA I am designing for BW is a staff combat are that plays with these ideas.

Take a look at this one (http://burningwheel.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=851). It could definitely use some tweaking, but it's a place to start.