Umbrean Waraxe, damage typo?

[Askew37]

Quick question that I'm just double checking on.

The Umbrean Waraxe, described on pages 176 and 194, lists the damage for its axe half as 2d8 for a medium sized version of the weapon. I'm assuming this is a typo, as that kind of damage is too high for a medium sized melee weapon (and considering the large sized Ogrun Warcleave has the same 2d8 damage). I'd assume the damage is suppose to read either 2d6 or 1d12.

[Killj0y]

I couldn't really debate this one. If it is an exotic weapon then the damage isn't necessarily in line with a balanced weapon due to the feat offset.

If it is a typo we will likely never know as no official errata has ever been released.

[Askew37]

It is an exotic weapon, but that's because it's a double weapon. It's a great axe with a spear at the end of it.

[moorg]

There's been no indication that it's a typo.

Since it's an Exotic Weapon, I assume that it's correct.

[Landwalker]

The thing weighs more than twice as much as a standard greataxe and nearly twice as much as an IK Maul (which by rights should weigh an absolute ton), and I guarantee you the spear point isn't adding thirteen pounds of weight. While the Iron Kingdoms equipment (and d20 in general at times) has always tended to hilariously over-exaggerate equipment weight, I think that, despite that, the weight discrepancy between an Umbrean Waraxe and a Greataxe is great enough that one can reasonably say "This isn't just a greataxe with a spear point—this is a honkin' big greataxe with a spear point."

Another approach would be to just consider it the Bastard Sword of Greataxes.

Cheers.