I am collecting some miniatures to use in my TOR games, and recently acquired this really lovely figure (image from manufacturer's website, not my own paint job!):



He is carrying some sort of warhammer but as far as I can recall, the game only has axes, swords, mattocks, spears and daggers as close combat weapons.

If hammers are covered in the rules then please let me know where, or if not, I would welcome suggestions on how to include them (types, stats, etc). Maybe it's close enough to be considered a mattock?

Voidstate had one in this document.

War Hammer
Damage: 6
Edge: G
Injury: 14
Encumbrance: 2
Group: Hammers
Notes: ―

Too, check Jon Hodgson's TOR Resources thread at the tip of the forum page for MANY nice creations that have been provided by your talented, fellow forumites.

Great miniature! Red Box?

Hammers are a funny one, because they are so frequently (though by no means exclusively) associated with later medieval periods than TOR has used to characterise Middle-Earth. With an absence of direct references to plate armour in the source material, and Imrahil arguably characterising the height of military technology as "a mail clad knight", weapons traditionally used to against plate become somewhat moot. This could be a huge can of worms which I'm too busy to plunge into, just so you know ahead of time! Once I have finished illustrating all these books we can also discuss Balrog wings and PC spell casters!

But just look at how awesome that mini dude looks! And, you know: Thor's Hammer. Though equally another can of worms - it's also known as a axe or club, and there's a case that it strictly being referred to as a hammer is a later thing. But I'm pretty much sold by how super he looks there.

Woah: http://red-box-games.com/index.php?main_pa...products_id=114

Not to mention that a one handed hammer of that size could hardly be used by any human. No, not even the Dunedain could wield that monstrosity.

Real life warhammers Jon speaks of were much smaller and different in shape.

A rather nice axe mini there, Jon. Not for children though.

Spurred on by this thread I've contacted a few chaps I know who are experts in matters Viking/Saxon just to see if I can get any primary source material about Early Medieval hammers. And hey if you got 'em post 'em here too.

I thought that was another of the ones I picked up for TOR but no, I was confusing him with this one:



Again, this is not my own paint job!

They are all from Red Box Games Miniatures - I think their Dwarves are great (very wide selection of excellent figures) and their Norsemen (Njorn) are my favourites for representing Bardings, Beornings and Woodmen.

The others I picked up are shown below:

Half-Orc (could do for a Great Goblin of the Misty Mountains, like the one killed by Gandalf in The Hobbit)


Halfling Adventurer:


Elf Adventurer:


Dwarf Adventurer (my own paint job this time, apologies for the terrible smartphone photos):

Red-Box-Games

Wow! They have some great looking figs.

It's a pity that I no longer paint miniatures like that anymore ... my eyes just can't take the strain. I've resorted to painting the whole miniature black and applying a gold dry-brush. This has the effect of making the miniature look like a fine chess piece ... to me, this is a suitable replacement. After all, it IS a game piece, right?

I know what you mean. I only started painting miniatures a couple of years ago and one technique I read about involved undercoating in black then dry-brushing in white over the black to create natural highlights for the colours proper to go on top of (remember, I said this was an undercoating technique). Well sometimes they looked so spiffing with just the dry-brushed undercoat it felt like a shame to paint them!

I can't wait to get these guys on the table to play TOR but I want my first games to be truly memorable, so am being patient. I've just ordered all sorts of basing materials, including artificial flowering plants like daisies and buttercups! My "Fellowship" when it finally hits the table will hopefully be suitably inspiring to draw my 13 year old son into the game.

Hi Jon,

I did a quick google and all I could come up with were "throwing hammers" allegedly used at the Battle of Hastings, but I could find no evidence for war hammers in any shape or form before the widespread use of plate armour.

One source said hammers were generally cheaper to make than edged weapons, and another said that farming and blacksmithing implements were often drafted into service due to the expense of equipping every combatant with a true military weapon, so in theory you could have hammers being used on the battlefield in the Dark Ages if the owner could find nothing better. A hammer could also have been a status symbol of sorts to show how physically strong the owner must be just to be able to wield it.

For my game I think I'll give the guy a very high Body rating, and suggest that the hammer is really a blacksmith-type tool the guy carries to show off his great physical strength.

The sources don't suggest these were technically difficult weapons to make - quite the opposite - they were just not as desirable to bring to the battlefield as an axe, sword or spear. Only when plate armour started to defeat these weapons did hammers come into their own.

It is therefore not too far a stretch of the imagination in my opinion that in the Viking/Saxon era they might have sometimes been brought along by some big bastard as a kind of macho status symbol weapon or perhaps by Sappers for use against fortifications and siege equipment.

This is the only hammer-like weapon I can think of which would be close to that era:

http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highl...axe-hammer.aspx

Anyway, hammers don't make particularly good weapons. Clubs and maces are just better balanced and easier to use for hitting people.

Maybe this will be of use?

Warhammer <=== BTW, this is a link, too! It is the site from whence I copied the below information.

A weapon used in the Middle Ages ( Medieval period ) by a Foot Soldier

Description of Warhammer

The weapons used during the Middle Ages include the Warhammer. The description of the Warhammer which provides basic facts and information about the weapon is as follows:

• Warhammer - This weapon had a hammer head on one side and a spike on the other
• Used as a versatile, close contact weapon
• The warhammer weapon could be mounted on either a long shaft or a short shaft
• A blow could apply tremendous force
• The hammer struck with force could apply significant injury to a knight in armor
• The spike end was used for grappling the target's armor or the reins of a warhorse
• The weapon was primarily used for bludgeoning an opponent and the hammer was particularly effective against opponents wearing plate armor and reducing the effectiveness of the shield
• Type or group of weapons - Bludgeoning Weapon

The Middle Ages was an extremely violent era in history featuring battles in both Europe and the Holy Land when the crusades, and the crusaders who fought them, were numerous. Feudal Lords and Knights used such weapons as the Warhammer in different types of warfare. The quest for power led to invasions of lands and territories which had to be fought for. Siege warfare, waged to win a castle or a walled town or city, was a frequent occurrence during the Middle Ages. Warfare during the Middle Ages, or Medieval era called for a variety of weapon expertise. Knights and men-at-arms ( foot soldiers, or archers ) used different types of weapons. The Warhammer was predominantly used by a Foot Soldier. The weapons used were dictated according to status and position. The weapons, armor and horse of the Knight were extremely expensive - the fighting power of just one knight was worth 10 ordinary soldiers.

Warhammer Training

Skill in the use of Medieval weapons and understanding the strategy of Medieval Warfare was necessary and a played a vital part in Medieval life. The training required by a Foot Soldier to use the Warhammer :

• Training method - The training method practised in the use of the Warhammer was based on strength and accuracy in hitting, or 'bashing' the target
• A "hit" was scored in Medieval weapons training by making light contact with a defined target area. A blunted or wooden weapon was used when practising with an opponent

The Makers and Making of the Warhammer

This Medieval weapon was made by a blacksmith. The materials required to make this weapon were:

• Iron
• Steel
• Occasionally Bronze

Blacksmiths are usually associated with making weapons in a village smithy but blacksmiths were an important part of a fighting army, making new weapons and repairing and the maintenance of old weapons.

It's interesting, especially when we are allowed to take some flights of fancy: I'm certainly not opposed to fantasy that "feels" right for the early medieval period. (also more generally rather unkindly known as the "dark ages")

You wonder if a person with sufficient skill to make a hammer good enough to use as a weapon would also be able to make a spear: you're looking at a fraction of the metal (so you can make many more) for so much more utility in battle. It "feels" like that would be the more likely occurrence, based on zero evidence beyond the rumbling of the porridge in my tummy this morning. If you can make a knife, it would seem unlikely you can make a serviceable spear.

I concur it makes an entertaining "hero" weapon - almost due to it's impracticality. If I was looking at that I'd probably prefer a great club, to really emphasise the "not a sword*" angle but that's just me. And despite spending a lot of time on my historical homework I'm happy that there's an element of fantasy in Middle-earth.

*The sword being the very symbol of warriorhood. It's not a tool, it has no practical purpose other than battle. You can't hunt with it, or chop or carve wood. It's extremely expensive and difficult to make and requires upkeep to no benefit beyond the ability to kill. It is not a practical tool outside of warfare, unlike many other things used as weapons.

Been reading some interesting stuff about hilt rings on migration era ringswords, and the idea (which in historical terms seems perhaps a little baseless, but hey it's a nice flavour for a game) that they were perhaps symbols of the bond between a lord and his vassal: He gave you the sword with a ring on it, and you were bound to his service: Rings being symbols of an unbreakable bond long before they were restricted to weddings. And hey. We're at rings. Which seems an appropriate echo to make.

Ooh just found this too: http://www.heorot.dk/beo-guide.html Nice!

Edit: Oh, heard back from my expert chums at Gripping Beast Miniatures. No hammers for Vikings in strict history. Zero evidence.

As mentioned I do think we can enjoy a slightly looser fantastical approach if it feels right.

Though we should perhaps also think about Helm Hammerhand. Is the hammer a nice bit of alliterated allusion to the tool? Or Thor?

Oh dem hilt rings. I'm not looking forward to the day when some experimental reenactor comes up with a perfectly reasonable idea for a practical use for those.

It's one of the many mysterious details where I quite enjoy to see it as the archaeological "unknown magical/ritualistic purposes. Probably." cliche.

@Helm Hammerhand: did he actually ever use a hammer? I thought it was a nickname pointing out he was known to pack a mean punch with his fist. (eeerrr, after hitting...hmmm...some Dunnish guy?)

This post has been edited by Jan Pospisil on Mar 29 2012, 04:47 AM

It's funny how things that can be quite frustrating from a purely historical standpoint become awesome springboards for a fantasy roleplaying game!

And curse you for making me go to the BM site! I have too much to do to be sucked into that!

Ring hilts are wonderful for trapping (and breaking) fencing blades...

Broke a friend's flexidagger by accident with a ring-hilted dagger.

You're thinking of a different kind of hilt rings.

Those hilts are, proportionally, no worse than a Japanese Daito/Shoto/Katana/Wakizashi tsuba nor the hilts of a Scots dirk. The one at the pommel end on the upper probably held decorative wood, and heavy hilts are counterweights; perhaps it was adjusted for balance.


But you're right, i was thinking of a different kind.



Check the dirk:

Hi Aramis

About large pommels providing counterweight: I read somewhere (sorry, unable to locate at the moment) that this traditional opinion can be untrue.
The main argument was that short swords often have big pommels, while sabers usually lack heavy pommels, despite being very unbalanced.
They went on explaining that an heavy pommel can be used to add circular momentum to a swinging blade (the wrist being the fulcrum). Short sword gain most benefit out of it, while sabers are already heavy enough.

This essay was from a sword building firm. Clearly it is no definitive proof, but they made some convincing arguments.
BTW, they traced the belief of "balancing pommels" to Victorian antiquarians, who in my opinion are the source of many evils like rapier guards mounted on broadswords blades

Edit: in a hurry I wrote backsword for "sword-rapier". Shame on me

To me that is an artificial "issue" that sword people like to discuss. Heavy pommels undoubtedly shift a sword's balance, they change how the sword handles and allow a certain way of use. Yes, some swords have very light pommels and are used differently.
No mystery there, there are many types and shapes of swords and not all are used in the same way.

Sweeping generalizations like "a sword pommel is meant to counterbalance the sword" or "a sword pommel has nothing to do with balance" are plain wrong to begin with.

Agreed. Hence cautious expressions like “this (...) opinion can be untrue” or “no definitive proof” on my part

I highly recommend "The Sword in Anglo-Saxon England" by Hilda Ellis Davidson for more insight into swords of the Migration Period for anyone who's interested in an in-depth study. It's referenced by so many sword expert's bibliography that it's a must-have.


Also, this is an interesting thread with regard to language to describe swords (sorry we're so many miles off topic now, but I find it all so interesting!) which could have use for Middle-Earth games:
http://netsword.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000528.html

A couple of points on hammers. Thor's iconic hammer was likely a blacksmith's hammer rather than a warhammer. Curiously the story of its making, including the "handle being too short" because one of the dwarfs took his hand off the bellows to swat a hitting fly does not match the actual process of making a hammer.

As a smith who has forged both hammers and spears I can say hat it is decidedly easier to forge a spearhead. Crafting he billet to forge a spear head from is also much easier if you have to weld it up out of bits of iron and steel.

As for using hammers as a weapon. Try it. Go down to your local hardware store and pick up a five pound (light) sledge or wood splitting maul, use it two handed. Now find a masonry hammer, use it one handed.

Used as a tool a hammer is great, especially as you get a bounce back that helps recoil it for the next stroke. Against a soft target you get an imbedded hammer.

For all hat they do look really cool.

I always assumed that "Hammerhand" meant the guy hit like a hammer, not hat he used one as a weapon. Consider the (in)famous sword "Beater". Aka Glamdring the "foe hammer". "Hammer" even though it is a sword.

I do like dwarf miniatures with great heavy hammers, they don't seem all that much worse to handle than mattocks, which living in the country I have also had far too much experience using. I think a Dwarf has a better build for using one as a weapon than I do.

Worthy of note is that the spear is the longest surviving and most widespread weapon of hand to hand combat. They are cheap and was to make, a pointy stick will do in a pinch, quick to train, and can be used for hunting or as tent poles when not fighting.

The sword is the best over all hand to hand combat weapon in terms of efficient use of materials, transference of energy in a stroke, etc. They also require quite a bit of time and skill to make well, hence their appearance as status weapons to this day.

True...

Me, I put a much heavier pommel on my 44" schlaeger blade because it allowed me to move the tip in a much more controlled way. I quadrupled the pommel's weight from .75 oz to 3oz, and it made a huge difference.

Also, a wide pommel has some other advantages for certain unpleasant applications: coup de gras - driving the blade through the eyes to avoid messing with gorgets - it provides a strike plate and pull plate for the other hand.
pommel strikes & punches vs armored targets (protects the hand).
parrying (again, protects the hand).

The sad thing is that many historians simply refuse to consider that many supposedly decorative features have practical applications for "off-label" use of various tools. I fear what history will make of side-cutting pliers in 2500...

I prefer fencing with hilt heavy swords.

As for side cutting pliers, they will be labled as "ritual objects".

The interesting thing is how little some tools have changed in form over the years. Look up the Maestermyr find a Viking age tool chest for examples. Some of those look like the ones on my work bench.

The Ring Hilted Sword was the result of some elven smiths and a little too much to drink one night in Rivendell. Somebody thought it would be a good idea to combine two relics of the House of Isildur in one...