D&D 5E Does any one else think staff is overpowered and houserule it?

[jaelis]

Does't really break anything then.

It would let a rogue/fighter use the GWF fighting style to reroll 1's and 2's on his sneak attack dice?

--
Ah but the sage says that doesn't work, the fighting style benefit applies only to the weapon dice. They really ought to errata that.

 

[Hillsy7]

There's no benefit. It's just another choice. I felt like it "made sense" given how the weapon works in real life, and it didn't seem unbalancing to make it that way.


Exactly. It's basically a change to damage type or form. I also think that visually it's more appealing to have a staff than two clubs, since basically only Dare Devil fights with two clubs but there are lots of examples of an agile staff wielder (see half of all martial arts movies).

For sure - I'm a big fan of just reskinning weapons to cover some of the mechanical disincentives built into the PHB - so if a player really likes the idea of having a morning star, but wants to have versatile, I'll allow it as a reskin of a warhammer or longsword. For me, it feels a little unfair to have a player wanting a certain weapon for narrative/character reason's, but feeling like he must choose another for mechanical reasons.....Just reskin it and be done....

 

[BookBarbarian]

I like the staff as it is. if you want to use it two-handed like a quarterstaff you can. If you want to use it with martial arts, be a monk and you can. Want to dual wield one with a Longsword Gandalf style, you can.

What I don't like is the Polearm Master feat's interactions with the Staff. It makes more sense to me to pull it off of that feat, and put the Spear in it's place.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The staff has gotten a little weird, I suppose it might have stemmed from the way it has always been a two-handed weapon, but in 4e was also a 1-handed implement. 5e may have 'simplified' that into it 'just' being a versatile weapon, but that's not actually simpler.

The other issue is that the bar for 'imbalanced' for weapons seems to be strangely exacting. Fighters/Paladins/etc get w/in a few (or 40) DPR of eachother and it's close enough, one class gets a small bonus on some out of combat checks, another gets a dozen rituals, meh, close enough.
But, weapon edges out another similar weapon by half a point and it's intolerable.
Also weird.

That said, since 3e I've felt like some weapons, particularly the quarterstaff, would be well-served to have different 'levels' of proficiency.

Simple-weapon proficiency with a dagger, for instance, maybe shouldn't let you throw it, simple-weapon proficiency with a staff should be OK to bop someone, but maybe not to do the cool quarterstaff moves like Robin Hood fighting Little John, no tripping & TWFing & such. But, with martial proficiency, go ahead, throw the dagger, go into a pugil stick drill with both end of that quarterstaff.

Heck, maybe all the cool/crazy quarterstaff stuff should be a Combat Style, or part of one (Double-weapon style, maybe)?

 

[Ninja-radish]

5E has arcane and divine casters who wipe their asses with reality, but a dude swinging a stick at someone is OP? Wow, I can just see how this would play out in combat:

Bad Guy Leader: "NO! Forget the old dude with the pointy hat who just incinerated 20 of us with a Fireball, GET THE GUY WITH THE STICK!"