Staff implement one-handed?

[Fedifensor]

I see this primarily as a balance issue. If the staff takes two hands to use as an implement, but the wand and orb only take one hand, there's an issue. Especially since the functionality of the orb exceeds that of the staff for most wizards.

 

[KarinsDad]

The primary evidence are the custserv rulings. There is also the fact that you have to wield an implement to gain it's bonuses, the fact that quarterstaves require two hands to wield and the fact that all staves count as quarterstaves.

But like I said I acknowledge it's a grey area, especially given that the custserv rulings are sometimes unreliable. I just feel there is some evidence to support no, and no evidence to support yes.

How does one wield an Orb?

The fact that the word wield is used is not evidence of anything other than "hold and use".

The staff vs. quarterstaff issue is a red herring. A staff is not a quarterstaff. It merely uses the quarterstaff rules when being wielded as a weapon. It does not use the quarterstaff rules when being wielded as an implement. There are no rules for that.

 

[Anthony Jackson]

I see this primarily as a balance issue. If the staff takes two hands to use as an implement, but the wand and orb only take one hand, there's an issue.

Remember, a staff counts as a melee weapon in hand, and thus allows opportunity attacks and flanking. This is not an enormously potent benefit, but it's non-zero. For a wand or orb wizard to do the same thing, they would need to wield a weapon in their primary hand and an implement in their off hand.

 

[Mort_Q]

Remember, a staff counts as a melee weapon in hand, and thus allows opportunity attacks and flanking.

You don't need to be armed to flank in 4e... but I will grant that an OA with a staff is slightly better than an unarmed OA (treated as an improvised weapon).

 

[Fedifensor]

Remember, a staff counts as a melee weapon in hand, and thus allows opportunity attacks and flanking. This is not an enormously potent benefit, but it's non-zero. For a wand or orb wizard to do the same thing, they would need to wield a weapon in their primary hand and an implement in their off hand.

So, I can either have a simple weapon that takes two hands and can be used as an implement, or I can have an implement in one hand and any one-handed weapon (including a bastard sword) in the other. I'd rather have a longsword in my other hand for more damage and a better proficiency bonus (go, Eladrin!). Sorry, that's not an advantage at all.

 

[KarinsDad]

So, I can either have a simple weapon that takes two hands and can be used as an implement, or I can have an implement in one hand and any one-handed weapon (including a bastard sword) in the other. I'd rather have a longsword in my other hand for more damage and a better proficiency bonus (go, Eladrin!). Sorry, that's not an advantage at all.

Actually, there is a slight advantage there in not having to have two magical items.

 

[AtomicPope]

Actually, there is a slight advantage there in not having to have two magical items.

If there is any advantage, it's clearly too slight for providing examples (based completely on the lack thereof).

If you're suggesting that it's an advantage to only have one magical item then you must also believe that Wizards will never want to, nor come across, additional magical implements - all of which provide very different benefits. There are many magical Orbs and Wands whose abilities far outstrip the bonuses of an Int-based dump stat Str class from engaging in an embarrassing round of melee. It's hardly an advantage for a wizard with Implement Mastery and Secondary Implement feat to use a single implement - in fact it's counter productive.

Many wizards want a second implement because the salient bonuses, although low, are untyped and therefore stack with any other bonuses. Gaining a +3 to hit once per encounter is always a safe bet.

If staves required two-hands as an implement (which they do not) they simply wouldn't be used. There are more reasons to not use a staff as a two handed implement, than to use a Wand and an Orb.

 

[Rowe]

They way our campaign handled implements like Staff of Defense, Orb and Wand is this.

Staff of Defense can count as your quarter staff. Your character has studied defensive tactics with Quarter staffs and can use all powers inherint in the impliment.

Orbs can be fastened on top of your quarter staff and don't need to be wielded separating to be used.

Wands can be grafted into your quarter staff for the same effect if you choose.

We added a bit of Custome staff making for the wizard class.

 

[KarinsDad]

If there is any advantage, it's clearly too slight for providing examples (based completely on the lack thereof).

I did not phrase that clearly. I meant that there is a slight advantage for not having to own two magical items in the case of using a single magical Staff instead of using a magical Orb and a magical Sword.

It is more party resources to supply the Wizard with two magical items (a weapon and an implement) instead of just one (an implement that can also be used as a weapon).

Like Anthony said: "This is not an enormously potent benefit, but it's non-zero".

It does have an associated cost for the Wizard to have a separate magical weapon and magical implement, and that cost is that the Wizard might not have a second magical implement (or some other helpful magical item) because he has a magical Sword instead (for little gain because Wizards rarely engage in combat except for a few special builds anyway).

With a staff, he gets two uses (implement and weapon) for the price of one magical item. That's an advantage. Not a huge one, but an advantage nonetheless.


Btw, my staff Wizard (up to level two) has twice hit on an OA because some NPC thought it was relatively safe or advantageous to move away from him. At higher level, this will happen less often, but it will still happen sometimes (i.e. a slight advantage).

 

[Fedifensor]

I did not phrase that clearly. I meant that there is a slight advantage for not having to own two magical items in the case of using a single magical Staff instead of using a magical Orb and a magical Sword.

It is more party resources to supply the Wizard with two magical items (a weapon and an implement) instead of just one (an implement that can also be used as a weapon).

Not really. The extra +1 proficiency bonus a longsword has over a staff compensates for using a magic sword that is five levels lower than the character. With the pricing of magic items in 4E, you can get an item 5 levels lower for next to nothing...especially if it is the fighter's hand-me-down sword that he no longer uses because he got a new one. By using a staff in two hands, you can't use a second implement or a shield, and you do less damage than the longsword.

Granted, most wizards won't bother using a weapon, because their at-will powers are better. However, Eladrin get longsword proficiency for free. It'd be nice to see them be able to use their proficiency without restricting their implement choice or forcing them into Wizard of the Spiral Tower.