I don't think I need to add anything.
Even if i don't wave it around, the extreme pressures created by the in/out flow between the kids running toward smiling and the kids running away screaming would collapse space time localy, creating what we call a black hole.
Expression of the post modern paradox : "For the love of god, religions are so full of shit"
Theory is always superseded by Fact...
... In theory.
“I’d hate to die twice. It’s so boring.” Richard Feynman's last recorded words
"Great is the human who has not lost his childlike heart." Mencius (Meng-Tse), 4th century BCE
I don't think I need to add anything.
Even if i don't wave it around, the extreme pressures created by the in/out flow between the kids running toward smiling and the kids running away screaming would collapse space time locally, creating what we call a black hole.
Now I'm stifling a shriek. Touche, my good man. Touche.
I would go with either 1 or 2 scimitars. 1 scimitar for the awesome Morgan Freeman/Azeem action of Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. (He slices & dices with that curved mofo in that movie!) 2 scimitars for some Drizzt Do'Urden action. (And that would add a defensive element as well...
Naginata would be tempting, and quarterstaff is great for defense. However, in close quarters combat, I guess I'm thinking mass combat, where efficiency rules. Quarterstaff could rarely kill someone in a single blow. A naginata takes a lot more effort to wield than a light sword (such as a katana or scimitar). On the other hand, a short sword or large knife would be very efficient, but would offer too little protection in mass close quarters combat. Also, no use for a shield because when they're on all sides of you, a shield just gets unwieldy and inefficient. Thus, I prefer a weapon that also serves as defense, yet is efficient. Also, scimitars are weighted differently than other swords. The business end is a bit heavier and the blade is curved, which is supposed to lend itself to constant slicing action with less effort as one blow flows gracefully into the next. Hence, scimitar ftw...
As a rogue my traditional close combat weapon would be two daggers. I would therefore take a Kris, which shall be made from Damascus steel.
The problem with the steel for a sword is, you can either build a very hard sword, which will be sharp for a longtime and you do that by putting the hot sword right after the oven of the forge into a bucket with water. That way you get a sharp sword but also a sword that can break easily, if its just bend a little too much.
Then you can forge a sword of weak steel. That steel you have, when you get the sword out of the oven of forge and let it cool down on its own. The problem with that one is, it will loose its sharpness pretty quick but is very bendable on the other hand and wont break easily.
The Damascus steel is a way of forging that originated in Persia, the today Sri Lanka in India I think. They used a rare ore called Wootz Steel, which had an amazing ability.
First of all they forged the sword in layers. Meaning they heated up a block of raw steel and then hammered it flat and then folded the two ends together. The new block was heated up again, hammered flat and folded again. That way you got a blade with more than 6000 layers of steel.
Then when the blade was ready they heated it up again in a oven close to its melting point and cooled it down then in a bucket of water. While in a normal blade then the molecular structure of the steel consinsting of ferrite and carbon would align in a quadratic way, with 4 ferrite atoms being in the 4 corners and 1 carbon atom in the middle, forming a glass like structure which easy breaks, if its bend; the damascus steel on the other hand would form long laps of carbon throughout the whole blade, acting like glue to the ferrite between the laps.
That gave the damascus blade the ability to be bendable and on the other hand never loose its sharpness. The blades had a huge economic impact for Persia back in those days and after a given time the steel they were made of, namely Wootz Steel was gone.
Nowadays its possible to build a blade with that abilities namely weak and hard metal aswell, if you forge it the way I talked about, but without the Wootz Steel you loose one very cool thing:
The Damascus sword was even resisting HCL-Acid, cause the Wootz metal had covered its laps of carbon in little ferrite tubes, like something from nanotechnology, making them resistive to Acid.
This blades was like the god of all blades. You can buy them for your kitchen till today and they cost around $600 - $50,000.
In combination with two Kris that would be my weapon . Look at the pattern on the blade, these are the laps of carbon:
"How dreadful!" cried Lord Henry. "I can stand brute force, but brute reason is quite unbearable. There is something unfair about its use. It is hitting below the intellect." ~ Oscar Wilde - The picture of Dorian Gray
You know, though I've already mentioned my personal choices, I also would not feel inadequatly armed with a kukri:
This one-handed infantry weapon is specifically designed for slashing and chopping, and the weight-forward blade and the double-curve of the cutting edge make it perform far beyond what one would expect from what is, after all, a small sword. Kukri blades are stout, typically over 6mm in thickness along the back, which lends weight to the stroke.
The kukri is the trademark weapon of the Nepalese Gurkhas, a division of the UK Army renowned for their courage and tenacity.