Is this a feasible combination

[Rev666]

Im currently playing a wererat rogue/ranger 1/2 who wields a rapier and a kukri. He has the improved feint feat so it can be done as a move action. My question is whether if the situation arose could he take a 5 foot step into melee, attack once, feint and then next round attack with both weapons and get sneak attack damage on both?

My thinking is when hes got base attack 6 and in 2 round blocks (assume no flanking is possible for the moment).

It could be:

A: single attack then 3 attacks with sneak damage.

B: single attack then single attack, both with sneak damage.

or

C: 3 attacks then 3 attack but no sneak damage on any of them.

An I right in thinking A is a viable tactic.

[Nirhael]

Feinting is a standard action. To feint, make a Bluff check opposed by a Sense Motive check by your target. The target may add his base attack bonus to this Sense Motive check. If your Bluff check result exceeds your target’s Sense Motive check result, the next melee attack you make against the target does not allow him to use his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). This attack must be made on or before your next turn.

Bolded for emphasis.

A melee attack is a single strike, so your Sneak Attack would only apply to the first hit you land on a foe you feinted in the previous/current round.

So D: Single attack then 1 attack with sneak damage and 2 without (Assuming no other factors involved).

[Rev666]

Bolded for emphasis.

A melee attack is a single strike, so your Sneak Attack would only apply to the first hit you land on a foe you feinted in the previous/current round.

So D: Single attack then 1 attack with sneak damage and 2 without (Assuming no other factors involved).

This is why I was unsure. I had already seen that line in the description of feinting but to me it seemed silly that it would only apply to the next attack and no others. When you think a feint is when you mislead your opponent one way then attack from the other. Considering you're raining down 3 attacks in quick succession on that attack you'd suspect theyd all be from an undefended position.

[Grayson01]

This is why I was unsure. I had already seen that line in the description of feinting but to me it seemed silly that it would only apply to the next attack and no others. When you think a feint is when you mislead your opponent one way then attack from the other. Considering you're raining down 3 attacks in quick succession on that attack you'd suspect theyd all be from an undefended position.

You ever get caught in the face be a surprise jap? The first one wakes you up.