[HoneyBadger]

Somebody really ought to do a study on weapon type/form efficiency as compared to the size/strength of the person weilding the weapon. It would make for an interesting thesis.

I don't know why Tolkien, or anyone else, felt the need to put axes in the hands of dwarfs, except for their Norse origins. Here's an interesting fact, however: Dwarfs weren't short, in Norse myth. They were, as far as can be told in modern times, as tall as humans. They only acquired their lesser status *after* the Viking age-probably influenced by the general shift of "faerie creatures" from large to small.

Axes, in combat, work by concentrating force-more than a sword-on a smaller area, but allowing the spread of force-more than a spear-to affect a greater area. The axe itself also acts somewhat like a lever, trading greater surface area for greater precision and striking power, which is why an axe requires more room to swing than a similarly sized sword, and much more than a spear does to thrust.

What does this mean? It means that, in the hands of a much smaller person, that lives in close quarters and thrives in heavy armour, you're putting a much larger, heavier weapon, that requires more room to swing, and that actually does less damage-especially to armour and compact targets-and has much less functionality and availability than a pick in similar circumstances.

Axes for dwarfs is great for Dominions, because it's pure myth. If you want something based a bit on reality and common sense, arm them with picks, spears, shortswords, macheti-type weapons, and crossbows.