New non-magical weapon

[Clistenes]

I am planning on creating a new weapon: I would be a heavy sickle (simple weapon, damage 1d8, criticals 20/x2, Slashing, 6lbs) but if you turn the weapon and hit the enemy with the convex side of the blade, it works as a scimitar (martial weapon, damage 1d6, criticals 18-20/x2, slashing).

In short, it would work as a scimitar (martial weapon) or as a heavy sickle (simple weapon) depending on how you hold it.

How much do you think this weapon should cost, if it is feasible at all?

[Vaz]

(Cost of Weapon a + Cost of weapon b) * 1.5 is a good guideline.

In regards to why you would make a reversible weapon do the same sort of damage twice, I don't know ("Aha, monster is resistant to slash, I shall change my sickle to scimitar! that way I Can do some... what, that is slash too?), but most weapons that allow two forms of combat are exotic.

In regards to why anyone would take this weapon, I don't know. If it could do piercing damage, then it may be worth it.

[Clistenes]

(Cost of Weapon a + Cost of weapon b) * 1.5 is a good guideline.

In regards to why you would make a reversible weapon do the same sort of damage twice, I don't know ("Aha, monster is resistant to slash, I shall change my sickle to scimitar! that way I Can do some... what, that is slash too?), but most weapons that allow two forms of combat are exotic.

In regards to why anyone would take this weapon, I don't know. If it could do piercing damage, then it may be worth it.

For flavor, mostly. It would be the iconic weapon of a temple/order. A weapon crafted for their clerics but that would still be a decent choice for their paladins and templars. The badge of office of the head of the order (who is at times a paladin and at times a cleric) would be a +3 keen holy magebane version of it, and they would keep holy or blessed versions of the weapon in their armory.
The two-handed version would be a fauchard/glaive.

[ArcturusV]

It sounds like, at least in spirit, what you are aiming for is a Khopesh. Or at least something in that vein.

My thoughts about that is that, I see the side with the lower requirement (the Sickle) as being the better damage side due to throwing 8s. Unless I was investing heavily in a Critical Hits build that is. But the paladins don't really get a lot of feats to go into that. Least I never see Paladins go into Critical Hit builds.

But that might also be a matter of choice. My personal choice would be to prefer the higher damage die regardless than the increased critical threat range. There might be others who would go the other way with it.

[Zanthy1]

(Cost of Weapon a + Cost of weapon b) * 1.5 is a good guideline.

Use this, and it would be exotic because of the 2 choices.

Maybe for flavor, you could have all members of the temple beyond recruit (like people who have been with the temple at least 1 year or something) gain exotic weapon proficiency with this weapon as a bonus feat.

[Alefiend]

Structurally speaking, the weapon would be very weak. A thin cutting edge on both sides of a blade mean the thing will be very prone to bending and whipping. The solution to this—a thick diamond cross-section—will make the blade much less able to slash deeply, defeating the purpose.

Mechanically speaking, the previous posters have the right of it; why duplicate the same damage type? Carrying a sickle (could be a kukri or scimitar refluffed) is distinctive enough. Perseus used a sickle on Medusa, after all.

Balance-wise, it's seriously underpowered for an exotic.

[randomhero00]

Perhaps consider it exotic, but also a double weapon. As far as fluff/how it would look inside your head, you could attack one way, then without turning it attack with the other side. In effect giving it an extra attack.

Realistic? No, but neither are most weapons in DnD.

[Zanthy1]

Perhaps consider it exotic, but also a double weapon. As far as fluff/how it would look inside your head, you could attack one way, then without turning it attack with the other side. In effect giving it an extra attack.

Realistic? No, but neither are most weapons in DnD.

That makes sense.

A thin cutting edge on both sides of a blade would make it a sword. Unless I misinterpreted what you said, then this is supposed to be a sword (or scimitar) that has a sickle hook at the end? Think like a smaller version of the sword from Final Fantasy X?

[Aasimar]

Why overcomplicate?

Just give it the exact statistics of a scimitar, but describe it the way you want, you strike with whichever side happens to be convenient in the fight as it progresses, represented by a single type of die.

Combat is an abstraction, after all.

[Spiryt]

Structurally speaking, the weapon would be very weak. A thin cutting edge on both sides of a blade mean the thing will be very prone to bending and whipping. The solution to this—a thick diamond cross-section—will make the blade much less able to slash deeply, defeating the purpose.



From China to Ireland, trough thousands of years, swords with thin cutting edges on both sides were popular to ubiquitous....

On a sickle like blade, two edges weren't popular at all, but there's no reason why there could be employed. Apparently someone just found it pointless.


Why overcomplicate?

Just give it the exact statistics of a scimitar, but describe it the way you want, you strike with whichever side happens to be convenient in the fight as it progresses, represented by a single type of die.

Combat is an abstraction, after all.

This is possibly best, if boring, solution. Weapons in 3.5 are anyway pretty much huge mess.

[Alefiend]

From China to Ireland, trough thousands of years, swords with thin cutting edges on both sides were popular to ubiquitous....

On a sickle like blade, two edges weren't popular at all, but there's no reason why there could be employed. Apparently someone just found it pointless.


This was more to my point; I left out a bit. Deeply curved blades with two sharp edges are generally too thin to make good weapons. Of course a straight blade can do well with two.

[Spiryt]

This was more to my point; I left out a bit. Deeply curved blades with two sharp edges are generally too thin to make good weapons. Of course a straight blade can do well with two.

This has absolutely nothing to do with with any curve or lack of such though - sickle/curved swords can be quite broad/thick as well, while straight ones could be thin/narrow.

Or generally with mass distribution that gave significant stiffness.

It just seems that when someone was making curved sword, he concentrated on giving it one pronounced edge, not two very different ones.

[randomhero00]

I got bored so I did a quick concept sketch as to how I'd imagine it.

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/580464_411731982241969_1873442621_n.jpg

[ArcturusV]

http://www.odinblades.com/Gallery/gallerypics/Swords/Main/Khopesh/5.jpg


For reference, the weapon I was talking about. As you can see it has a fairly decent design very, very similar to yours. It's an egyptian weapon from the early middle kingdom era, if I remember. And not all that commonly used in DnD.

If I recall it used to have statistics in 2nd edition but it was dropped in 3rd/3.5. So most players probably aren't used to the weapon giving a distinctly unique feel to your priesthood.

[Spiryt]

Khopesh of whatever era had just one edge, at least in absolute most known cases.

On this page you have plenty of originals sketches with cross-sections.

http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?p=98160


Again, I'm not sure if one with two really needs distinctive mechanics in really simple system like 3.5.

[Zanthy1]

Khopesh of whatever era had just one edge, at least in absolute most known cases.

So why not just include that the other edge is sharpened? Thats even more simple

[Clistenes]

It sounds like, at least in spirit, what you are aiming for is a Khopesh. Or at least something in that vein.

My thoughts about that is that, I see the side with the lower requirement (the Sickle) as being the better damage side due to throwing 8s. Unless I was investing heavily in a Critical Hits build that is. But the paladins don't really get a lot of feats to go into that. Least I never see Paladins go into Critical Hit builds.

But that might also be a matter of choice. My personal choice would be to prefer the higher damage die regardless than the increased critical threat range. There might be others who would go the other way with it.

Mmmm....maybe making it the convex edge work as a longsword would be better?


Use this, and it would be exotic because of the 2 choices.

Maybe for flavor, you could have all members of the temple beyond recruit (like people who have been with the temple at least 1 year or something) gain exotic weapon proficiency with this weapon as a bonus feat.

Making it exotic kind of would defeat its purpose, since it's supposed to be useable by people with either Simple Weapon Proficiency or Martial Weapon Proficiency, but if you do have Martial Weapon Proficience, it works better.

In short, its a good weapon for a cleric, but also a good weapon for a paladin or fighter.


This was more to my point; I left out a bit. Deeply curved blades with two sharp edges are generally too thin to make good weapons. Of course a straight blade can do well with two.

I don't think that would be a big deal. Most D&D weapons aren't realistic at all, anyway.


Why overcomplicate?

Just give it the exact statistics of a scimitar, but describe it the way you want, you strike with whichever side happens to be convenient in the fight as it progresses, represented by a single type of die.

Combat is an abstraction, after all.

But the point of it is that a cleric can use it as a simple weapon and a paladin can use it as a martial weapon, so it can't be just a scimitar with another name.


I got bored so I did a quick concept sketch as to how I'd imagine it.

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/580464_411731982241969_1873442621_n.jpg

I was thinking of something like this:

http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos/items/13/002113/ph-0.jpg

[ArcturusV]

Here's my somewhat crazy, inelegant solution. Rather than be dual bladed, go with one Blunt, one bladed for Slashing. The blunt side throws a 1d6. Slashing counts as Martial and throws a 1d8. Differing dice and differing damage types gives it situational use. Though in the majority of the situations the martial side would be better.

Oddly due to the hooked nature of what Randomhero drew I would almost wish it had a bonus to something. Trips? Disarms? Eh.

[Joe Eskimo]

if you're interested in pursuing the khopesh, its latest version can be found in sandstorm under the weapons section. A one handed exotic weapon. 16gp 1d6 18-20x2 4 lb. Slashing. Just say it's sharpened on both sides. I kind of remember the pharaoh's guards in the mummy wielding golden double edged khopeshs. Not historically accurate but they looked cool.

EDIT: it's the 3.5 version btw. The 3.0 version can be found in the FRCS.

EDIT: it could also be used to make trip attacks.

[Drglenn]

Have it count as a scimitar/khopesh and give the order's god the war domain and it as a favoured weapon.

[Gildedragon]

Note that the khopesh is an axe, with the outside edge beig the cutting one.
For your thing, strength is not an issue, make it out of adamantine or some other fantasy ore.
Mechanically it's not that strong, not enough to warrant an EWP feat but neither are most EW. What about making it a one-handed double weapon. You get 2 attacks and 2 enchantments out of it. Or like the Crescent Blade, make it so that it gives the second, weaker, attack for free?

I would make it a deity's favored weapon and give martial clerics access to it.
It means that your npc priests can have it easily

[Kuulvheysoon]

I'd actually propose making an Initiate feat (à la Dragon Magic/others), and have proficiency with this weapon as the bonus, then add some spells to their list. That way, it really solidifies it's position as a weapon of that diety (as only divine casters of that god can take the specific Initiate feat), and it makes the EWP count as about half of a feat (what most EWP are worth really).

[Clistenes]

It seems that most people don't like the idea. I know it is mechanically weak, but as I said, its main purpose would be to be a simple and martial weapon at the same time that can be the main weapon for all the members of the order, be they clerics or paladins.

It's true that the scimitar isn't a good weapon of choice for paladins, so I could make the convex side work like a longsword.

Making the back of the sword work as a club would be a good idea for a martial or exotic weapon, but its purpose wouldn't be to be used in two different ways by the same person, but to be used differently by people with different proficiencies.

Making the users take an initiate feat would be against its purpose. If they had to take a feat they could just take a martial or exotic weapon proficiency and use the best martial or exotic weapon available.

The order accepts followers of several gods, but its mostly pelorian, so the War Domain is not an option.

If I finally use the idea, I guess I could go for a longsword/heavy sickle with a price of (15+12)*1,5 = 40,5 gp. Expensive, but not important compared to the cost of enchanting it.

Thank you all for the help.