Does anyone else think this is a bug in CB?

[Nifft]

You're playing games with a word that has 2 uses. Mace as a weapon group/category and Mace as a named weapon. I really which they had avoided that nonsense. What is an "attack"?

A staff (implement) is both an implement AND a weapon as quoted directly from the PHB errata by me. It specifically is treated as a quarterstaff which is a member of the "Staff" weapon group. Staff Fighting allows you to treat a Staff (weapon group) as a double weapon so you treat it as if you're wielding it in each hand. Please stop playing word games.

The strange thing is that the CB -- and perhaps therefore WotC as a whole -- are also playing "word games" regarding Staff (weapon category) and Staff (implement category). They seem to regard them as the same thing.

Try equipping a magical Quarterstaff for a vanilla Sorcerer -- one with no special feats. He'll get the full enhancement bonus to attack and damage.

I find it hard to believe they'd make such an obvious mistake if it were a mistake.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Kingreaper]

are both also "enhancement bonuses" and don't stack.

*meh* if they stack there are some powers they make VERY effective.

I see no problem with them not stacking. I would probably allow them to stack on a trial basis though, just because I like healing It allows the party to come back from closer to dead which=fun.

By your logic any game element that grants you a bonus based on "enhancement bonus" (the value of) is therefore of the "enhancement bonus" type. This breaks the basic tenet of 4e exception based design. It would require you to declare the "type" of every bonus explicitly including "untyped". The whole point of "untyped" is that it's type isn't declared and it isn't declared on purpose.

They could use the phrasing "a bonus [type isn't mentioned, so it's untyped] equal to the enhancement bonus"

 

[Kingreaper]

You're playing games with a word that has 2 uses. Mace as a weapon group/category and Mace as a named weapon.

I am illustrating what you have been doing.

The staff weapon group is a weapon group containing:

Quarterstaff
Quarterstaff-primary end
Quarterstaff-secondary end
(and hopefully several others eventually: there are other staff group weapons in existence that aren't represented yet.)

The Staff Implement group is an Implement Group containing:
Quarterstaff.

A staff (implement) is both an implement AND a weapon as quoted directly from the PHB errata by me. It specifically is treated as a quarterstaff which is a member of the "Staff" weapon group. Staff Fighting allows you to treat a Staff (weapon group) as a double weapon so you treat it as if you're wielding it in each hand. Please stop playing word games.

A staff implement is a quarterstaff weapon.

It is not ANY staff weapon group weapon. It is only a quarterstaff weapon.


Your logic seems to be:

All staff implements are quarterstaffs
All quarterstaffs are staff weapons
Therefore all staff weapons are staff implements

This logic is analogous to:

All dogs are canids
All canids are mammals
Therefore all mammals are dogs.


And the final conclusion:
Therefore both ends of the quarterstaff are staff implements

is analogous to

Therefore both elephants and mice are dogs.

 

[CovertOps]

A staff implement is a quarterstaff weapon.

It is not ANY staff weapon group weapon. It is only a quarterstaff weapon.


Your logic seems to be:

All staff implements are quarterstaffs
All quarterstaffs are staff weapons
Therefore all staff weapons are staff implements

Well I'll give you that you're close.
All staff implements are Quarterstaves
Quarterstaves are part of the Staff weapon group.
Therefore Staff Implements are part of the Staff weapon group.
Staff Fighting applies to weapons in the Staff Weapon group.
Therefore Staff Fighting applies to Staff Implements.

 

[Kingreaper]

Well I'll give you that you're close.
All staff implements are Quarterstaves
Quarterstaves are part of the Staff weapon group.
Therefore Staff Implements are part of the Staff weapon group.
Staff Fighting applies to weapons in the Staff Weapon group.
Therefore Staff Fighting applies to Staff Implements.

Your conclusion in this is correct, and your argument is sound, but the italicised premise is wrong.

Staff Fighting actually applies only to Quarterstaffs


But quarterstaffs are staff implements, so that's beside the point.


HOWEVER the fact that staff implements become double weapons doesn't make them double implements. That has been my point this whole time.

 

[CovertOps]

They could use the phrasing "a bonus [type isn't mentioned, so it's untyped] equal to the enhancement bonus"

Find me an example ANYWHERE where they used this phrasing without mentioning a type and I might agree with you. All cases I found were of the phrasing:

"An item bonus equal to ..." etc.

 

[CovertOps]

Your conclusion in this is correct, and your argument is sound, but the italicised premise is wrong.

Staff Fighting actually applies only to Quarterstaffs


But quarterstaffs are staff implements, so that's beside the point.


HOWEVER the fact that staff implements become double weapons doesn't make them double implements. That has been my point this whole time.

Sorry about that...was doing it from memory

 

[Kingreaper]

Find me an example ANYWHERE where they used this phrasing without mentioning a type and I might agree with you. All cases I found were of the phrasing:

"An item bonus equal to ..." etc.

A quick search on the compendium finds me: Blessed Shifter
Divine Assault
Imaginative Reaction
Tactical Feint
Saving Breath
Tactical assault
Saving Grace
Touch of Salvation
Tacticians Word
Iron Hands
and
Guiding Rebuke


However, I will note that these are all referring to stat modifiers


OH, looking through items:
Marauders Armor is the first I find (and it refers to enhancement bonus)

 

[CovertOps]

HOWEVER the fact that staff implements become double weapons doesn't make them double implements. That has been my point this whole time.

I've never claimed they become "double implements". I have always clearly claimed that Staff Fighting says "Treat quarterstaff as a double weapon" and that the sidebar (in the errata) for double weapons says "Wielding a double weapon is like wielding a weapon in each hand." It is "like" wielding a weapon in each hand because you are wielding the "quarterstaff" in each hand. A quarterstaff also being a Staff implement means you are ALSO wielding an implement in each hand. That said there is this thread: http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/257735-staff-fighting-dual-implement-spellcaster.html where they are also debating this topic. But I still question if you even need Staff Fighting at all because CB doesn't require it. Yes I know CB isn't a rules reference, but that's a pretty obvious/blatant bug if it wasn't intended to work that way.

 

[Kingreaper]

I've never claimed they become "double implements". I have always clearly claimed that Staff Fighting says "Treat quarterstaff as a double weapon" and that the sidebar (in the errata) for double weapons says "Wielding a double weapon is like wielding a weapon in each hand." It is "like" wielding a weapon in each hand because you are wielding the "quarterstaff" in each hand .

A weapon =/= the weapon.

When you wield an Urgrosh, are you wielding an Urgrosh in each hand?

Or are you wielding the axe head in your main hand, and the spear in your offhand?