Does anyone else think this is a bug in CB?

[webrunner]

No. It is ONE weapon with two blades on it and a single area to grip the weapon in the middle.

Apparently you can't read. It is really simple. DIS: "You must be wielding an implement in each hand". No where in that rules quote does it say you must be wielding TWO IMPLEMENTS.

I have already quoted the PHB rules on this several times.

The original rules from PHB p240:
"Unlike other implements, a staff also functions as a melee weapon (treat it as a quarterstaff)."
Per the PHB most recent errata:
"Using an Implement as a Weapon: Most implements cannot be used as weapons. However, an implement like the staff is expressly usable as both an implement and a weapon. When you wield such an implement as a weapon, you follow the normal rules for using a weapon."

You don't just "treat it as a weapon"...it IS a weapon (specifically a quarterstaff).


I'm not sure why you keep repeating this non-truth. You don't just "use a Staff as a Quarterstaff". It IS a weapon and the rules/errata support that. It just so happens that the weapon it is to be treated as is the Quarterstaff as opposed to a club or something else.

A double weapon is mechanically two weapons. That is the entire purpose of double weapons and why they are called double weapons as they are a weapon that counts as two.

Wielding one item in two hands is not wielding "an" item in "each" hand. "an" is one, "each" is for each one. "an implement in each hand" means two implements.

As a quarterstaff is a two handed weapon, wouldn't you be "wielding a staff in each hand" without staff fighting by your logic? All being a double weapon does is 'split' a weapon into two weapons, but as you say you don't need two implements for DIS to count.

 

[Kingreaper]

And the normal rules allow me to wield it "in each hand" as a double weapon. It doesn't suddenly stop being an implement because of that.

When you wield a double weapon, you wield it in both hands.

This is like wielding a weapon in each hand, and can be used for such purposes.


It is NOT like wielding the double weapon in each hand (impossible, because double weapons are by definition two-handed)

Again, I ask, if I gave you 10,000 bags, with $10 in each, how much money would I be giving you?

 

[Jhaelen]

Again, I ask, if I gave you 10,000 bags, with $10 in each, how much money would I be giving you?

Please send the bags to me, I'll count the money - I promise!

 

[DracoSuave]

To put it another way: The rules say you can use a Staff as a Quarterstaff. It does not say you can use the end of a quarterstaff as a staff implement. If that was true, you could use each end of the quarterstaff as aa Staff, which would then each bet treated as it's own Quarterstaff, which would then each be treated as two Staffs, so hypothetically you would have an infinite number of sub-staffs. That's not exactly logical is it?

Except you're confusing the five gold staff listed on the equipment guide for the entirety of all staffs. Absolute nonsense. That's like saying all 'mace' class weapons must follow the 'mace' entry on the weapon table; that means that clubs and greatclubs, being maces, must therefore do 1d8 damage and be versatile, even tho they have completely different entries than the mace.... yeah.

See... your logic is absolutely irrational. Taking the listing for a singular discrete object and saying it applies to all objects that share a property with it is absolutely nuts.

ONLY THE FOLLOWING THREE THINGS ARE CONSIDERED QUARTERSTAFFS:

The Quarterstaff.
The Arcane Implement 'Staff' that is listed in the list of arcane equipment.
A Magic item that is enhanced as a 'Staff' class magic item.

NOTHING ELSE.

By the same logic as well, if you have a Flaming Quarterstaff +1, you'd not be allowed to use its power to 'flame on' if you were a fighter, because according to the entry on Magic Items: Staffs, the powers of a magic item: staff can only be used if you can use it as an implement. This logic is utter buttkiss, because the entry on Magic Items: Staffs do not apply to the entry on Magic Items: Weapons.

It is logical to assume therefore that just because rules exist to apply to one specific object or group of objects, that that rule does not necessarily apply to all objects that share a single property with that object or group of objects.

This is what is true:

---- No distinction is made between the staff weapon group and the staff implement type. Any and all feats that require you to choose one allow you to choose either. This is -exactly the same- as how there's no distinction between the light blade weapon group and the light blade implement type. I know this part is hard, but if you have a feat that says 'choose an implement type' then 'light blade' is a perfectly legal choice, because it IS an implement type. Staffs follow the -same- rule because there IS no listed exception.

---- 'You can treat the staff as a double weapon. As a double weapon, both ends of the staff deal 1d8 damage. The primary end gains the defensive and stout properties, and the secondary end gains the off-hand property. For more information on double weapons, see adventurer's vault p10'

'Wielding a double weapon is like wielding a weapon in each hand. In the table, the first line of the double weapon’s entry describes the end of the weapon wielded in your main hand. The indented line describes the weapon’s other end, wielded in your off-hand. The two ends of a double weapon can have different proficiency bonuses, damage, properties, and weapon groups. The weight and price entries represent the total for the weapon, rather than only one side.'

'An enchanted double weapon gains all benefits of the enchantment on each end (even if one end would not normally qualify for the enchantment). This does not increase the frequency of use of any power possessed by the item; if you wield a double weapon with a daily power you can still only activate that power once per day.'

This is the sum-total of rules text on the issue.

Firstly, when you use staff fighting with an enchanted quarterstaff, it IS considered two enchanted weapons.
Secondly, absolutely no text exists that claims or otherwise hints that this is splitting the quarterstaff into any object that is described on page 221, or on 240. I do not know who thought it did, but the text clearly indicates you're making this crap up. Therefore, you cannot be using an infinite recursion of quarterstaves, nor does that interpretation make sense under the rules.
Thirdly, enchanted weapons can be used as implements if they qualify.
Fourthly, you have, by the rules, two enchanted weapons. Therefore each enchanted weapon can be used as an implement if they qualify.
Fifthly, each enchanted weapon is a staff.
Sixthly, if you are of a class that can use staffs as an implement, then you can use staffs as an implement. Tautologies are hard!
Seventhly, you have two staffs, one in each hand.
Eighthly, you have an implement in each hand, and DIS is made happy.

Each one of those points above IS the rule as it is written. It works.

 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

I would give you XP for that, but I can't. Well said.

That said, I'm nut sure I agree with your overall conclusion on not getting the bonus for dual implement spell caster, a staff, and the staff weapon fighting feet. You do so on the basis of it giving an enhancement bonus, and the "two bonuses from the same game element" rule don't stack.

Now, I agree that the dual implement spellcaster feat gives an enhancement bonus.

Now, its debateable whether or not the "same game element" rule comes into play for two reasons.

First, what is the game element that is giving you the bonus? Is it the feat giving you the enhancement, or is it the second implement that is giving you the enhancement bonus? If it the feat that is the game element that is giving you the enhancement bonus, then its not the same game element.

Second, the "same game element" rule in the eratta is only speaking to untyped bonuses. Now, in fairness, normally untyped bonuses are the only kind that CAN stack... but I don't that by the RAW one can pronounce a general rule regarding to "game elements" regarding stacking bonuses where the bonuses are typed but the rules state that the same type CAN stack, as is the case with dual implement spellcasting, which in order to function allows stacking of enhancement bonuses.


So, strictly speaking, I do think the rules allow one to use the above mentioned combo of feats to get twice the staff's enhancement bonus to damage.

 

[DracoSuave]

Well, Dr R, I've changed my mind and stance to allowing it based on the reasoning you've given (and others have given before.)

It makes sense, and besides, Staff Fighting it's not even the optimal configuration for DIS (main-hand with useful attack-based property/power, off-hand with passive property/power not related to attacking) which means I wouldn't even disallow it for 'power' reasons.

 

[DracoSuave]

And the normal rules allow me to wield it "in each hand" as a double weapon. It doesn't suddenly stop being an implement because of that.

Once you relent that you are wielding two weapons, then you can apply:

Using a Weapon as an Implement: If you’re able to use a weapon as an implement, the weapon works like a normal implement for you, but you use neither the weapon’s proficiency bonus nor its nonmagical weapon properties with your implement powers.

As you can use a staff, the two weapons you have can both work as normal implements. No exception exists that says staffs are exempt from this rule in any way.

Therefore, you apply it.

 

[CovertOps]

Once you relent that you are wielding two weapons, then you can apply:

Using a Weapon as an Implement: If you’re able to use a weapon as an implement, the weapon works like a normal implement for you, but you use neither the weapon’s proficiency bonus nor its nonmagical weapon properties with your implement powers.

As you can use a staff, the two weapons you have can both work as normal implements. No exception exists that says staffs are exempt from this rule in any way.

Therefore, you apply it.

When I was looking at the section on "Using an Implement as a Weapon", I saw that part but didn't really "read" it. Good catch. Also can't give you XP.