D&D 5E legal staff and shield for hexblade?

[Coroc]

Certain the developers know about it:
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/11/07/polearm-master-feat-one-handed/


Whether that was by design, I don't know.

just klicked your link

below the tweets this is a thought
by:

Robert Mongar


Quarterstaffs.
The problem is that if you allow the quarterstaff wielder to make 2 attacks while wielded in one hand and wearing a shield, you have COMPLETED invalidated 2 weapon fighting.
Consider two different level one fighters. Both wear a Chain mail shirt, have 16 strength, and are human.
Fighter A takes the Dual wielding feat, and the Two Weapon fighting style. He wields a long sword in one hand (a marital weapon) and a short sword in the other. He has:

An AC of 17.
+5 to hit.
Main attack damage of 1d8+3 (7.5 average damage per hit)
Bonus action attack of 1d6+3 (6.5 damage)

Fighter B take Polearm master and the Dueling fighting style. He wears a shield on one hand, and his quarterstaff (a simple weapon) in the other. He has:

An AC of 18.
+5 to hit.
Main attack damage of 1d6+5 (8.5 damage per hit)
Bonus action attack of 1d4+5 (7.5 damage per hit)

In addition, fighter B can make an attack when creatures move next to him.

So, if you are allowed to make the bonus action attack while wielding a quarterstaff in one hand, the dual wielding Fighter with added feat support, is completely redundant. He has lower AC (despite being boosted by a feat) and he deals less damage (despite being boosted by his fighting style, and wielding a martial weapon over a simple weapon).
This is before considering the implication of the greater chance to make an opportunity attack.
I propose that the clear intention of Quarterstaffs being included in Polearm mastery, is that they can be used in this manner while being wielded in two hands. I will concede that Jeremy Crawford made it clear that at least part of this feat does work- likely the ability to take an opportunity attack when an enemy approaches.

Or have I just got something completely wrong?


Reply
March 22, 2015 at 2:21 PM

end cite

The ruling by Jeremy imho is implying that Jeremy is human, since making errors is human.

If it is intended that way, well you never see me playing RAW considering this then.
At my table:
Ok you want to be Gandalf, fine get dual wield and your quarterstaff does 1d4 as your sword does 1d8
You want to be monk and twirling that quarterstaff, ok we can even talk about 1d8 damage 2handed since you are an martial artist optimising simple weapons to the max.
But: you found a loophole supported by sage advice which totally invalidates other builds and is much cheaper concerning equipment and gives you 2 more AC while looking ridiculous in my theatre of the mind, nope.

 

[jaelis]

The ruling by Jeremy imho is implying that Jeremy is human, since making errors is human.

Jeremy correctly explained what the rules say, it was not an error. And I think that if there were actual printing or editing error they would have been fixed via errata already.

I guess you feel that being able to use the staff this way is a design error. That's more a question of opinion. I wouldn't have designed it that way myself, but also I don't think it is so terrible as you make out. Compared to using a polearm master glaive, you give up a noticeable amount of damage and reach, in exchange for the shield AC bonus.

As for TWF, you can make the same complaint about polearm master in general. People complain about TWF overall, maybe it needs a boost. Or maybe it is OK if not every fighting style is optimal

 

[brehobit]

But: you found a loophole supported by sage advice which totally invalidates other builds and is much cheaper concerning equipment and gives you 2 more AC while looking ridiculous in my theatre of the mind, nope.

I'd not thought about the dual weapon vs staff and shield thing before. I think that's a good point. The only things I'd really point out is that:

1. with the feat, shouldn't it be d8 for both weapons?
2. with dual weapons, you can use Dex rather than Str. In some cases that's a huge advantage (for example my last game in 5e was on the seas and heavy armor wasn't a reasonable choice for the most part).

But that brings the damage to a tie, the AC bonus still +1 in favor of the staff wielder, and the opportunity attack. Yeah, that still seems good unless you are set on a Dex fighter. Same number of traits/feats and the weird one (staff and shield) largely beats out the traditional sword and shield.

Unrelated, I wish GWM was a bit worse (-2/+4 maybe?) and that Great Weapon Fighting didn't utterly suck (adds a bit less than +1 damage per weapon die, so something like +.9 or +1.8.). I feel like fighting with a two-handed weapon just doesn't make much sense unless you have GWM. The small damage difference isn't generally worth 2 points of AC. (Two-handed sword vs. long sword is about 2 points in damage difference once you take into account fighting style).

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

when any time I hear that argument, I show them scenes of Gandalf whacking everything with his staff.

That depends on what an arcane focus staff actually is in your game.

If they look like this then you probably won't be whacking anything with them.
Credit: Magic_staffs by Verdy-K

 

[Horwath]

That depends on what an arcane focus staff actually is in your game.

View attachment 90704If they look like this then you probably won't be whacking anything with them.
Credit: Magic_staffs by Verdy-K

That is why gandalf has very functional staff. No "WoW like" decorations or oversized BS.

 

[Coroc]

The staff with the crescent Looks quite painful though, i would not want to be whacked by that one

 

[Horwath]

[MENTION=82555]the[/MENTION] dual wield questions, I use same action for offhand attack as the main hand. That works for this case and any other where TWF is crap choice.

Sent from my SM-J320F using EN World mobile app

 

[jasper]

My arcana focus staff is a pool noodle. With a lead core.

 

[Blue]

That depends on what an arcane focus staff actually is in your game.

View attachment 90704If they look like this then you probably won't be whacking anything with them.
Credit: Magic_staffs by Verdy-K

Amusingly, if those are actually "Magic staffs" as the credit line shows, then 5e explicitly lets you use them as quarterstaves. DMG pg 140.