A weapon observation...

[Storyteller01]

Let me start by describing the weapon:

Roughly 8" long solid metal spike, no extras or frills. 4" x 1/2" x 1/4" handle with 4" of triangular cut pokeyness (think of a stilletto with three distinct edges). Rather deadly and easy to conceal.

Now, the original use is to hold the grip and stab. Pretty basic stuff. However, if you hold the weapon at roughly the center you have 2" of point/edge on one end and 2" of blunt projection on the other (similar to a police kubaton). Wearing a glove protects your hand from the edges.

Handling the weapon in this manner will reduce it's damage potential (probably 1d2 blunt/1d2 piercing), but I was wondering:

1) Could a Rogue use the weapon in this manner for a sneak attack?
2) Could said Rogue use it as a double weapon, even though it is Tiny on its own?
3) How would you rule if a Rogue wanted to use 2 such double weapons?
4) Would using the weapon in this manner require a specialized feat or series of feats (beyond TWF)?

Thanks for your help.

 

[Nifft]

1/ Of course a Rogue could sneak attack with your weapon. A Rogue can sneak attack with a ham sandwitch (at a -4 nonproficency penalty, of course).
2/ No, but (like a halberd) he could choose the type of damage he delt.
3/ See above (not an issue).
4/ It's just silly. Wouldn't allow it any more than I'd allow a katar to count as a double weapon, or a short sword with a spikey handguard.

-- N

 

[Storyteller01]

Not thinking about the damage so much as the speed such a use would improve. It would be the same as shifting grips with a knife, I suppose.

 

[domino]

1/ Of course a Rogue could sneak attack with your weapon. A Rogue can sneak attack with a ham sandwitch (at a -4 nonproficency penalty, of course).

What if he took the feat Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Ham Sandwich?

I ask because I love the idea of a Rogue sneak attacking someone with a ham sammich.

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

No, it's improvised, not exotic; different category. There're feats to fix that, though. There's one in Sorcery and Steam, IIRC in CW, and some other places...

I thought about that too much.

 

[Galethorn]

Well, one has to wonder about the Age Category of the bread...

If it's a Venerable Baguette that the sandwich was made from, I'd allow it to do 1 point of lethal damage. Heck, I even had a friend who cut his hand on the crust of some bread like that.

Therefore, I'd have to say that a ham sandwich on the right kind of bread would be an excelent sneak-attacking weapon. Even better if the mustard is strong enough...that poison would have a pretty high DC to resist...

 

[Nifft]

Not thinking about the damage so much as the speed such a use would improve. It would be the same as shifting grips with a knife, I suppose.

Sure, and that's why I'd allow him to choose Bludgeoning or Piercing damage. It's quite a nice feature, and no Finessable Rogue weapon currently allows it.

Look at how few Rogue weapons deal any damage type besides Piercing.

-- N

 

[Sejs]

1: Yes. See Ham Sandwich, above.
2: No. No more than you can use a longsword as a double weapon by slashing with the blade and smacking someone with the pommel.
3: It'd be fine, just not as double-weapons. No double double-weapons. Ever.
4: No, as I wouldn't allow it as a double-weapon in the first place.

 

[lonesoldier]

1) Could a Rogue use the weapon in this manner for a sneak attack?
2) Could said Rogue use it as a double weapon, even though it is Tiny on its own?
3) How would you rule if a Rogue wanted to use 2 such double weapons?
4) Would using the weapon in this manner require a specialized feat or series of feats (beyond TWF)?
5) Do you love ham sandwhiches?

1) Sure! As long as he is sneaky.
2) Too small to be a double weapon.
3) He could dual wield, but not count them as double weapons (See #2 for the reason why)
4) I would assume that if the being is proficient with the knife he is proficient in all it's uses. No feat would be required to use it in such a way.
5) Hell ya!

 

[Dogmeat]

I just had a hand sandwich and the bread definitely was not venerable and the mustard was quite good with none of the fermentation required for the above said poisoning. In fact I believe I shall have another.