Quarterstaffs as Implements

484 posts / 0 new
Last post
I thought I would share a conversation I recently ahd with wizards of the coast. I have gotten used to a certain level of annoying, WoD-esque, "ask you DM, we refuse to give a clear answer" responses from WotC customer service lately, so I wasnt expecting much when I asked for an official clarification on whehter or not quarterstaffs (the weapon) and staffs (the implement) can be used interchangeably as magical staffs.

I was pleasnelty surprised. Bellow are the copy/pasted text of my question and the answer.


QUESTION

Customer (Andrew David Fernandes) 05/06/2009 04:34 PM
Can a Quarterstaff Weapon be used as an implement for a class that uses staff implements (such as wizards).

I know that staff implements can be used as quarterstaff weapons, but I wish to know if the same is true in reverse.

To be more specific, if I possess a cunning Quarterstaff (an enchanted weapon) can I use it as an implement to cast my wizard spells, adding its enhancement bonus to the attack and damage roll, and also applying the effects of its property to the attack.

I ask this question because the D&D character builder allows me to do so, but others in my gaming group have expressed reservations as to whether or not this is intended. I wish to know for certain whether this is correct or not in order to play my Living Faerun character.



ANSWER

Andrew David,

Hello. No, a quarterstaff is not the same thing as a staff, so it can not be used as an implement.

Please write us back if you require any further assistance.




I had asked this question because recent changes to the character creator finally made staffs and quarterstaffs seperate entities but failed to correct the bug that allowed them to be used interchangeably, lending credence to the view that the fact that you can do it in the character creator meant it was legal.

I have a sneaking suspicion that this will not put the wishful thinking to rest, but I have seen the issue debated in a number of threads both here and in character optimization, ussually in the context of whether or not a wizard and/or invoker can use an cunning quarterstaff to deliver attacks and impose saving throw debuffs. Hence, I thought Id share this with anyone who cares.
Ugh... So a staff is a staff except when it's not a staff? This just seems silly, particularly considering staves aren't exactly the most powerful implement right now and quarterstaffs aren't amazingly good weapons either. This feels like the whole 'you can't whack people with a rod, even though it's a solid, club-like bar of wood/metal' thing again.
Nothing strange there. An implement staff and a quarterstaff are two different objects - for one thing, they have separate posts in the equipment lists. One is an implement, the other is a weapon.

Quarterstaff weapons can't be used as Staff Implements, because you don't have any ability to use that kind of weapon as an implement.

Implement staffs are only possible to use as Quarterstaffs because a special rule allows it.
Ugh... So a staff is a staff except when it's not a staff? This just seems silly, particularly considering staves aren't exactly the most powerful implement right now and quarterstaffs aren't amazingly good weapons either. This feels like the whole 'you can't whack people with a rod, even though it's a solid, club-like bar of wood/metal' thing again.

I have to agree with you. The mundane versions of each even weigh the same amount and cost the same in the PHb. You can use a staff implement as a quarterstaff with your proficiency bonus (at least I assume) to smack someone in the head with it as a basic attack. Yet the reverse is not true because.....why? And along come Wizard of the Spiral Tower and Eladrin Sword Wizardry where a longsword weapon can be used to deliver those same spells a normal old quarterstaff can't. And sorcerers get daggers to use as implements, another weapon. Can anyone at WoTC actually explain why a staff is not a staff? Do the sellers of such items keep them separated in their stores. "You're a wizard? Oh no you don't want to buy that staff. Why? Because it's not a wizard's staff! You want one of the ones over here. These are wizard staffs. What do you mean it looks the same? It's completely different, trust me."
They have been holding onto this for a while.

However, nobody has really been pushing this lately either. Id expect a PHB FAQ answer about it or something more official to clarify this position.

Especially now that actual weapons are being used as implements (dagger, etc.)

And that you can take Staff Weapon Focus and get bonuses to implement powers.

While I used to be a vocal supporter of the Great Staff Divide, nowdays I am rather ambivilant. Id go with whatever floats your boat.
My Sorc Guide Link: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19649162/Joes_Sorcerer_Guide_AP_update_51509 My Genesi Wizard Blaster Link: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/25082729/Miniguide_to_Genesi_LightningThunder_Blaster_Wizard_%2806-2010%29
Nothing strange there. An implement staff and a quarterstaff are two different objects - for one thing, they have separate posts in the equipment lists. One is an implement, the other is a weapon.

Quarterstaff weapons can't be used as Staff Implements, because you don't have any ability to use that kind of weapon as an implement.

Implement staffs are only possible to use as Quarterstaffs because a special rule allows it.

Its more like, you can't use a quarterstaff as implement, because the quarterstaff was made as a weapon of war so when it was built the makers didn't infuse them with enchantments and stuff, so you (as a caster) can't channel your magic through them...

Implements staffs can be used as quarterstaffs because they share the same physical characteristics.
And that you can take Staff Weapon Focus and get bonuses to implement powers.

While I used to be a vocal supporter of the Great Staff Divide, nowdays I am rather ambivilant. Id go with whatever floats your boat.

It took me a while to realize that there were two questions involved, and Wizards have now come down pretty consistently on both.

The first is whether your Staff counts as a Quarterstaff for effects such as Weapon Focus and similar. (Wizards rule that it does.)

The second is whether a regular weapon Quarterstaff counts as an Implement. They have now repeatedly ruled that it doesn't.

These rulings are fully consistent, at least.
I am surprised this debate has raged so long because it is one of the few times CS has consistently given the same answer.

Usually they give conflicting answers like they have with whether you need to cast a spell through an orb to use OoI feature or whether you can cast it through a different implement and then activate OoI with an orb in your off hand. I've seen responses from CS that say to wield is to cast through (just like a rogue has to strike with a dagger to gain the +1) and I've seen another response that says you just need to hold the orb to activate OoI.
Its more like, you can't use a quarterstaff as implement, because the quarterstaff was made as a weapon of war so when it was built the makers didn't infuse them with enchantments and stuff, so you (as a caster) can't channel your magic through them...

Implements staffs can be used as quarterstaffs because they share the same physical characteristics.

Bingo. A wizard's stave is specialy prepared to channel supernatural forces. A quarterstaff is just a heavy piece of wood.
Ive never had any problems with them for inconsistancy. I know 4 people whove asked similar questions twice now (this makes 3 but I ahvent spoken with the other fellows yet) and we all got the same answers. I find they sometimes prevaricate and give USELESS answers, but when they respond clearly they also respond consistantly, at least within my experiance.
So wait... let me get this 100% clear.

A quarterstaff can be used as a weapon, but not as an implement

A staff can be used as an implement OR as a weapon

a staff uses the weapon stats of a quarterstaff when used as a weapon
Sorry for double post, but after some looking I gotta throw in another word on it.

According to PHB page 240 "A staff is a shaft of wood as tall or slightly taller than you are, sometimes crowned with a decorative crystal
or some other arcane fetish. Fashioned either as a
quarterstaff or a walking staff
, it is also imbued with
arcane enchantments so that you can channel your
spells through it."

So if a 'staff' is fashioned as a 'quarterstaff' doesn't that mean staff=quarterstaff?

Like couldn't you walk into a store and say "I want a staff, fashioned as a quarterstaff, and since it's a quarterstaff, I want to make it an adamantium quarterstaff"

That being the case, what's the distinction?
After a DC 30 Streetwise check and frequent use of Intimidation, I have it on good authority that WotC has brokered a deal with staff-selling merchants in nearly every campaign world for a kickback of gold from staff sales. See, the staff merchants ordered too many of the things, so they had to figure out a scam to sell more - thus our current situation.
Personally, I am appalled at this blatant ruse on both their parts, as anyone knows you can carve mystic runes on any damn piece of wood. Hold on, someone's at the door...
Oh hey, members of the staff merchant guild. And who's this third guy? You're an Avenger of...WotC? But can they even....AHHHHHHHHfjkdsjfl sdjlfjksd
The distinction between a staff and a plain ol' quarterstaff is the same as a pact blade vs a plain ol' dagger, or a tome and a plain ol' book.

You channel spells through the former. You cannot channel spells through the latter. Yes they look very similar, but one is not capable of channeling magical energy.

When staff wizards can start using quarterstaffs as implements the same day my wizard can start using cookbooks to summon, or my warlock can cast spells through a knife.
I have no problem with this ruling, although it makes little sense to me in light of newer books.

I can understand them taking this position if they wanted to keep weapon enchantments from being used on implement based powers. This is where I thought they were going with this demarcation between staffs as weapons and staffs as implements. However, with the release of arcane power and the arcane implement feat, what is the real point of preventing quarterstaffs from being used as implements. Any arcane caster that wants a weapon enchanted implement can take a feat and have it. It seems silly to say, no you can't have a cunning quarterstaff and look like a wizard, but you can get yourself a cunning fullblade of hugeness and save or die people into oblivion. You just can't do that and look like a traditional wizard. The only reason I can think of as to why they still stick to this ruling is that no one from R&D has revisited the issue and CS wants to actually stick to one ruling on the issue.
When staff wizards can start using quarterstaffs as implements the same day my wizard can start using cookbooks to summon, or my warlock can cast spells through a knife.

Um, no offense or anything, but your warlock can now cast spells through a knife.

OMG the sky is falling!!!!!!
Um, no offense or anything, but your warlock can now cast spells through a knife.

OMG the sky is falling!!!!!!

Through a pact blade, which isn't a regular knife, even if it uses the same stats in combat. Much the same way as Wizards cast through staffs, which aren't actually quarterstaffs, even if they share the mechanical effects in combat.

Sorcerers seem to be the exception to the rule, but then again, their approach to magic is also different.


Note: I have a problem with mundane objects being used to channel magic if it's something that's applied fairly (or at least consistently). Why should a Warlock be able to use a regular knife to use as an implement, but can't pick up a scepter and use it as a rod implement?
It makes no sense at all.

'Heavy blade' and 'light blade' are both weapon groups and implement types. 'Staff' is both a weapon group and an implement type.

A longsword is a weapon in the heavy blades group, so it is both a weapon (heavy blade) and an implement (heavy blade).

A quarterstaff is a weapon in the staff group, so it is both a weapon (staff) and an implement (staff).

Except it's not, according to WotC.

I still don't understand why.

"My flying carpet is full of elves."

Sorcerers seem to be the exception to the rule

And swordmages.

And any arcane caster that picks up the Arcane Implement Proficiency feat and selects 'daggers' or 'heavy blades' or 'light blades' as their new implement type.

Being able to use weapons, including mundane ones, as implements is now the norm for arcane classes, not the exception.

"My flying carpet is full of elves."

According to PHB page 240 "A staff is a shaft of wood as tall or slightly taller than you are, sometimes crowned with a decorative crystal
or some other arcane fetish. Fashioned either as a
quarterstaff or a walking staff
, it is also imbued with
arcane enchantments so that you can channel your
spells through it."

So if a 'staff' is fashioned as a 'quarterstaff' doesn't that mean staff=quarterstaff?

Like couldn't you walk into a store and say "I want a staff, fashioned as a quarterstaff, and since it's a quarterstaff, I want to make it an adamantium quarterstaff"

That being the case, what's the distinction?

read the same block. a staff (implement) is imbued with magic so that it can be used as implement.

that means that wizards can't pick up a stick to use it as implement ... or a other quarterstaff for that matter ...
Qube's block builder: if you want to create blocks for powers, items and monsters for this forum, but don't know html
Signature in a box
For years, I've lived a double life. In the day, I do my job - I ride the bus, roll up my sleeves with the hoi-polloi. But at night, I live a life of exhilaration, of missed heartbeats and adrenalin. And, if the truth be known a life of dubious virtue. I won't deny it - I've been engaged in violence, even indulged in it. I've maimed and killed adversaries, and not merely in self-defence. I've exhibited disregard for life, limb and property, and savoured every moment. You may not think it, to look of me but I have commanded armies, and conquered worlds. And though in achieving these things I've set morality aside, I have no regrets. For though I've led a double life, at least I can say - I've lived.

3.jpg
D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - Stone Gaint

Scipio: And Chihuahuas have definitely improved in the "attacking ankles, yapping, and being generally annoying" environment. Me: OK, am I the only who sees an analogy between forum trolls & Chihuahuas?
Some of my work:
XDMC 19 (silver): A full fledged assassins guild (with stats, skill challenges, ...)link XDMC 14 (Bronze): a one shot campaign for beginning DMs/players. link XDMC 16: Paragon path: the Epitome: being better then all then any one else. link (note: this is balanced) XDMC 25: The Gelatinous Cube mount Guide To Disreality: a collection of houserules - Introduction & table of content
My ego in a box
who am I kidding? my ego would never fit in a box
So an impliment staff can be used as a weapon. While a weapon staff can not be used as an impiment. Then I am just going to enchant my impiment staff with viciousness.

I see what WOC was initially trying to do separating the two, but with how the game has developed I think it is pointless.
So an impliment staff can be used as a weapon. While a weapon staff can not be used as an impiment. Then I am just going to enchant my impiment staff with viciousness.

I see what WOC was initially trying to do separating the two, but with how the game has developed I think it is pointless.

except weapon enhancements only work with weapon keyword powers

Also i don't see the problem people are having with this

Square=staff

Rectangle=quaterstaffs

all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares
Neither do I, Wolfbrother, but then, Ive always been a bit of an elitist.

It surely is not a difficult concept to grasp intellectually.

Before arcane power was released, it was an understandable feat of wishful thinkin on the part of people who wanted to take a paragon path (ANY paragon path) other than Wizard of the Spiral Tower). Now that the gaming gods haff given us Arcane Implement Proficiency I really would have expected people to calm down, man up, and pay the damn feat for their uber-ness. Alas, no such luck.

Ahh well.
WotC needs to learn to read their own rule books.

Quarterstaffs are Staffs, full stop.

They are in the Staff weapon group, thus they are Staffs.

Wizards get Staffs as implements.

They can use anything within the Staff weapon group as an implement as it is written.

If you put a weapon or weapon group in the implement line then it can be used as an implement.

If WotC doesn't want it to work they way they need to officially errata the rules rather than just saying nuh-uh it doesn't work that way when it in fact does as written.
Implements and weapons are different things, grinning Oni, unless you are specifcally allowed to use a certain type of weapon as an implement. I doubt it ever occured to them that it would be interpreted otherwise - that anyone would consider the weapon group and the implement type equivalent.

That said, I wouldn't be too terribly surprised if there were an official rules clarification of some sort on the issue at some point in the not-too-distant future.
Staffs is a weapon group.

Staffs is what is listed under usable implements.

If they don't want it to be so they need to change either the name of the weapon group or the implement.

When you list a weapon or weapon group under implements then they can be used as implements.

So no, weapons and implements are not always different things, see the sorcerers dagger for instance.
read the same block. a staff (implement) is imbued with magic so that it can be used as implement.

And I would suggest that you keep reading the same block as it continues on the next page and says this:
'If your class can’t normally use staffs as implements, or if you’re not using an implement power, a staff is simply a magic quarterstaff.
For example, a cleric could pick up and use a +3 staff of fiery might as a melee weapon: He would add 3 to his melee attack rolls and damage rolls, and if he scored a critical hit with the staff, he would add 3d10 fire damage. However, he couldn’t use the staff ’s power in conjunction with a cleric power that had the fire keyword, because cleric powers can’t be cast through staffs.'

But wizard powers can. Again, what's the distinction?

And here's the Arcane Implement write up under Equipment in chapter 7:
'Arcane Implement: Wizards use orbs, staffs, or wands as focus items for their spells, while warlocks use rods or wands. Using a nonmagical implement confers no benefit. You can purchase a magic implement to gain an enhancement bonus to attack rolls and damage rolls with your arcane powers. A staff implement can also function as a quarterstaff.'

So the mundane version that you purchase for 5 gp and is really just to allow you to use your Arcane Implement Mastery feature is 'nonmagical'. So what is to keep you from using a normal quarterstaff to do the same thing?! And as well, since you can use the property from a magic weapon when you use it as an implement, what is preventing me from using a Cunning Staff to apply a penalty to saving throws? Only CS as far as I can see. I think my DM is smarter than this (hell, my two year olds are smarter than this).
Through a pact blade, which isn't a regular knife, even if it uses the same stats in combat. Much the same way as Wizards cast through staffs, which aren't actually quarterstaffs, even if they share the mechanical effects in combat.

Sorcerers seem to be the exception to the rule, but then again, their approach to magic is also different.


Note: I have a problem with mundane objects being used to channel magic if it's something that's applied fairly (or at least consistently). Why should a Warlock be able to use a regular knife to use as an implement, but can't pick up a scepter and use it as a rod implement?

You may not have seen arcane power yet, but there is a feat that allows any arcane class to be trained in another arcane classes implement and use that implement for all their powers. It's called arcane implement training and would allow a warlock to use a dagger (any dagger) as an implement because dagger is a sorcerer implement. You can also use light blades or heavy blades (swordmage implements).
Well, look, you're entiteld to your opinion, and if you can con your DM into agreeing with your opinion, then god bless your scheister's heart, but as far as wizards is concerned thats simply not how it works. I build my characters to be RPGA legal - taking advantage of credulous game-masters always feels liek cheating to me.

As the fellow above said, all staffs are quarterstaffs. All quarterstaffs are not staffs. it does not seem like complicated or fundamentally flawed idea to me.

As noted above, the IC expliantionf or this is that implement staffs are specially perpared/enchanted to serve as magical implements. Quarterstaff weapons are not. Staff implements are also heavy pieces of wood like quarterstaffs, so they can be used as a weapon. Just like a holy avenger sword can be used as a kitchen knife, if you really want. Once again, it does not seem like a complicated issue.

I know that Quarterstaffs belong to the "Staff Weapon group" and that this is confusing with the staff implement type, but it seems clear that it is an unintentional convergeance. You can call it bad editing, but that has no bearing on the rules issues.

Anyhoo, thats the last Ill say on teh subject.
The biggest problem has been sloppy wording.

Wizards can use what?

Staff Implements?

No. They use staff, wand, orb.

Do you take Weapon Focus: Quarterstaff? No. Do you take Weapon Focus: Polearm (which a staff maybe ought to be grouped under)? No. Its WF: STAFF.

If they spelled out Staff Implement, and referred to Quarterstaff for every weaponized one this would make more sense.

It would ALSO help if weapon focus: staff didn't pump up Staff Implements, which are not quarterstaves (but can be used like them)


So from a purely logical point of view, we understand the Square/Rectangle thing.

But, they refer to just about everything as a TRAPEZOID so it gets totally muddied.

Then, we have daggers that are weapons usable as implements, which violates their own rules about weaponized implements unable to use the Item Powers.

THIS is the problem.
My Sorc Guide Link: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19649162/Joes_Sorcerer_Guide_AP_update_51509 My Genesi Wizard Blaster Link: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/25082729/Miniguide_to_Genesi_LightningThunder_Blaster_Wizard_%2806-2010%29
Well, look, you're entiteld to your opinion, and if you can con your DM into agreeing with your opinion, then god bless your scheister's heart, but as far as wizards is concerned thats simply not how it works. I build my characters to be RPGA legal - taking advantage of credulous game-masters always feels liek cheating to me.

As the fellow above said, all staffs are quarterstaffs. All quarterstaffs are not staffs. it does not seem like complicated or fundamentally flawed idea to me.

As noted above, the IC expliantionf or this is that implement staffs are specially perpared/enchanted to serve as magical implements. Quarterstaff weapons are not. Staff implements are also heavy pieces of wood like quarterstaffs, so they can be used as a weapon. Just like a holy avenger sword can be used as a kitchen knife, if you really want. Once again, it does not seem like a complicated issue.

I know that Quarterstaffs belong to the "Staff Weapon group" and that this is confusing with the staff implement type, but it seems clear that it is an unintentional convergeance. You can call it bad editing, but that has no bearing on the rules issues.

Anyhoo, thats the last Ill say on teh subject.

Ah nice, the that's the way it is and now I'm going to stick my fingers in my ears and I can't hear you and by the way you're a bad person approach.

Perhaps you should consider that other people have another legitimate reading of the rules text and that there might actually be a reason for the debate rather than calling people that disagree with you con-artist and scheisters out to dupe unwitting DM's into whatever personal advantage the can squeeze out of the rules.

I personally would like the designers to write the rules as they intend them to work, and if they don't, own up to it and fix them rather than start spewing nonsense that doesn't make sense.
The biggest problem has been sloppy wording.

Wizards can use what?

Staff Implements?

No. They use staff, wand, orb.

Do you take Weapon Focus: Quarterstaff? No. Do you take Weapon Focus: Polearm (which a staff maybe ought to be grouped under)? No. Its WF: STAFF.

If they spelled out Staff Implement, and referred to Quarterstaff for every weaponized one this would make more sense.

It would ALSO help if weapon focus: staff didn't pump up Staff Implements, which are not quarterstaves (but can be used like them)


So from a purely logical point of view, we understand the Square/Rectangle thing.

But, they refer to just about everything as a TRAPEZOID so it gets totally muddied.

Then, we have daggers that are weapons usable as implements, which violates their own rules about weaponized implements unable to use the Item Powers.

THIS is the problem.

Plus you get to use Weapon Focus: Staff with a staff implement (as long as you use both hands). This is in the FAQ for PHb on WoTC site. So you can add the +1 to damage (which increments per tier) on your wizard powers that you cast through a staff implement that you hold in two hands. So a staff implement is a quarterstaff weapon for that at least. They aren't forcing a distinction there.
The plural of "staff" is "staves," not "staffs." Staffs is the old postal abbreviation of Staffordshire, a landlocked county in the West Midlands. I now return you to your regular scheduled internets. ;)
So an impliment staff can be used as a weapon. While a weapon staff can not be used as an impiment. Then I am just going to enchant my impiment staff with viciousness.

I see what WOC was initially trying to do separating the two, but with how the game has developed I think it is pointless.

This pretty sums up my stance on the whole thing nicely. Apparently it does something like this:

If a staff has been specially prepared it can be used as an implement by those with the proper training. If the staff has had this preparation it is referred to as a staff implement or possibly a magic staff. If not, it's refered to by it's weapon name. Therefore if an item is listed as a quarterstaff it's safe to say it hasn't been properly prepared for use as an implement.

However, the whole argument seems pretty pointless given the following:
  • A staff implement has been listed as functionally indentical to a quarterstaff with no noted cases where it stops being one.
  • Quarterstaffs are valid targets for weapon enchantments.

Therefore, it doesn't look like there's any reason you couldn't place weapon enchantments on a staff that's been prepared for implement use. Nor is there any indication it would lose the ability to be used as a implement afterwords. As such, you could very well make a Cunning Staff which is usable with implement powers, you just have to start with the right kind of staff.
Interested in a rambling collection of game ideas? Check out Schemes of the Dancing Chimera.
The plural of "staff" is "staves," not "staffs." Staffs is the old postal abbreviation of Staffordshire, a landlocked county in the West Midlands. I now return you to your regular scheduled internets. ;)

See my sig. Or a dictionary.

-------------

It sort of blows my mind a little that an issue like this can go on for so long without it somehow getting the ear of whoever is ultimately in charge of how the rules are supposed to work so an official ruling can be handed down from on high about how this is really supposed to work. Clearly there's room to read it both ways, because people clearly are reading it both ways, smart people who otherwise understand the rules really well. It seems like an easy thing to step in and fix.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer. Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.
The idea that "staffs" is improper english comes from any halfway decent dictionary of the English language. Words that end in the "ff" or "fe" sound are pluralized into a "ves" sound. Compare wolf/wolves, knife/knives, and what have you. In Old English the word was singularly stæf, note the way the end of that word sounds, as a similar sound construction survives in modern English. Staff/Staves. This isn't even some sort of "American English" versus standard English split either, as my copy of the OED and Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary both agree. (I checked before I posted.)

------------------------------------------------

Quarterstaves that aren't staves, but staves that are quarterstaves is just to dang annoying of a distinction for me to keep in my mind while I am trying to run a game. It would have been far easier to say "These are powers you can use Implement enhancements on, these are powers your can't." and vie-versa for Weapon powers. Got a +2 Magic Weapon Staff, it only applies to weapon keyword powers. Got a +2 Implement of Whatever Pact Blade, that only works on Implement powers. Much simpler, and they can even muddy the waters a little by making some items or paragon class features double dip.
The idea that "staffs" is improper english comes from any halfway decent dictionary of the English language. Words that end in the "ff" or "fe" sound are pluralized into a "ves" sound.

So you can push enemies of clives, shirts have cuves, and you can get cotton puves? :P (Sorry, I have a weakness for playing with words.)

This isn't even some sort of "American English" versus standard English split either, as my copy of the OED and Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary both agree. (I checked before I posted.)

Here are three dictionaries that disagree with you: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/staff, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/staff, and http://www.yourdictionary.com/staff. The funny thing is the first link goes to the Merriam-Webster website.
Interested in a rambling collection of game ideas? Check out Schemes of the Dancing Chimera.
Even better, Here are both of the sources that you cited disagreeing with you.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer. Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.
What I find interesting is:
sorcere's using a dagger as an implement can only add the enhancement bonus to their spells (no other effects) and a swordmage can only add the enhancement bonus and extra damage granted by a property (but no other effects like push, daze, etc). At least by reading the rule books
What I find interesting is:
sorcere's using a dagger as an implement can only add the enhancement bonus to their spells (no other effects) and a swordmage can only add the enhancement bonus and extra damage granted by a property (but no other effects like push, daze, etc). At least by reading the rule books

Yep, that's what you get from reading those lists as strictly exclusive. Of course, by that reading you also can't use anything but the enhancement bonus when using a weapon as a weapon (see PHB2, page 203 and compare the general weapon entry to weapons as implements). That's why I tend to lean away from reading things that way. It also sets up a contradiction with the oft quoted FAQ 17.
Interested in a rambling collection of game ideas? Check out Schemes of the Dancing Chimera.
Sorceror's with daggers include properties as well...

Anyway... "Staff" is a keyword... The weapon "Quarterstaff" has the "Staff" keyword. The implement "Staff" has the "Staff" keyword. A Wizard may use a "Staff" as an implement.

If it has the keyword you can use it.

This is why you DO NOT REUSE KEYWORDS. If WotC says a "Quarterstaff" doesn't have the same "Staff" keyword as a "Staff" implement then they need errata. Until then there is no listing "Staff (implement)" in the Wizard implements block, only "Staff" therefoe they may use any "Staff" keyword item.

VERY simple True/False test.
I am Blue/Green
I am Blue/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both rational and instinctive. I value self-knowledge and understanding of the world; my ultimate goal is self-improvement and improvement of the world around me. At best, I am focused and methodical; at worst, I am obsessive and amoral.
Sign In to post comments