Rods as weapons?

[Wolfspider]

I was just wondering how rods are handled according to the rules for weapons. For example, take a rod of the python. The description says it strikes as a quarterstaff. Does that mean it is also a Large weapon, requiring two hands for a medium-sized character to use? I thought that rods were scepter-like objects, which would imply one-handed. Of course, the description also says the rod of the python is a bit longer than usual. The rod of the viper is similar, being likened to a heavy mace in its effects. Does that mean that a character would have to be able to use a heavy mace in order to weild the rod? What about a druid? Would he be able to use it without losing his abilities?

Just a few questions.

 

[kreynolds]

Anyone want to add that it doesn't matter because Mind Blank makes you immune to quarterstaffs and maces? Just kidding.

Most rods are scepter like but there are a few exceptions. If the item says it is treated as a "x", treat it as a "x".

 

[Wolfspider]

Thanks for the input. Is this described anywhere in the rules? I like page references.

 

[kreynolds]

Well, you said yourself the item was treated as a "x". That kinda seems straight forward to me. It's kind of like, "The Rod of the Whatever is treated as a quarterstaff in all repects to melee combat." I take that to mean that it isn't treated as a hamburger.

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

I agree. Anyone who says an item should be treated as a quarterstaff and then expect it to be treated as something other than a quartestaff should work for the government, not a gaming design company.

 

[Wolfspider]

I agree. Anyone who says an item should be treated as a quarterstaff and then expect it to be treated as something other than a quartestaff should work for the government, not a gaming design company.

LOL!

OK, point taken. I'll try to avoid asking stupid questions in the future.

I just got a funny impression when I read that a four foot rod should be treated as a quarterstaff, a Large weapon that is usually at least six feet long. I guess it's just a really short quarterstaff.

It's kind of like, "The Rod of the Whatever is treated as a quarterstaff in all repects to melee combat." I take that to mean that it isn't treated as a hamburger.

Well, hold on to your sesame seed bun. I was just reading over the description of the rod of withering when I noticed that it is treated as a "+1 light mace" in all respects except that it "deal no hit point damage." Why not just say it strikes as a Medium +1 Simple weapon for attack and DR purposes instead of giving it damage stats that it won't use? It's similar to saying this vehicle is treated as a bicycle except that it has three wheels.

Perhaps the guy who wrote those descriptions works part time as a census taker or something....

 

[kreynolds]

Well, hold on to your sesame seed bun. I was just reading over the description of the rod of withering when I noticed that it is treated as a "+1 light mace" in all respects except that it "deal no hit point damage." Why not just say it strikes as a Medium +1 Simple weapon for attack and DR purposes instead of giving it damage stats that it won't use?

Here is the description ripped from the SRD.
The rod of withering acts as a +1 light mace that deals no hit point damage. Instead, the wielder deals 1d4 points of temporary Strength damage and 1d4 points of temporary Constitution damage to any creature she touches with the rod (by making a melee touch attack). If she scores a critical hit, the damage from that hit is actually permanent ability drain. In either case, the defender negates the effect with a Fortitude save (DC 14).

Here's a breakdown. The weapon is designed and wielded as a mace, such as the grip, shaft, and head. It is considered a +1 weapon. It's power is magical, not raw damage so you get +1 to hit but not +1 to damage. The description of this weapon can be turned over, flipped upside down, torn apart, pulled inside out, and debated until it has been beaten dead with a stick and it is still pretty straight forward. Try not to read too much into it.

 

[Wolfspider]

The description of this weapon can be turned over, flipped upside down, torn apart, pulled inside out, and debated until it has been beaten dead with a stick and it is still pretty straight forward. Try not to read too much into it.

I still think it's a hamburger.

 

[Aahz]

Well, hold on to your sesame seed bun. I was just reading over the description of the rod of withering when I noticed that it is treated as a "+1 light mace" in all respects except that it "deal no hit point damage." Why not just say it strikes as a Medium +1 Simple weapon for attack and DR purposes instead of giving it damage stats that it won't use?

Because you can have feats such as Weapon Focus (Light Mace), Improved Critical (Light Mace), and Weapon Finesse (Light Mace) affect how you use this rod.

Weapon Specialization (Light Mace) might be able to work as well, allowing you to do 1d4+2 temporary constitution damage.

Christopher J. Bono

 

[Shin Okada]

Well, hold on to your sesame seed bun. I was just reading over the description of the rod of withering when I noticed that it is treated as a "+1 light mace" in all respects except that it "deal no hit point damage." Why not just say it strikes as a Medium +1 Simple weapon for attack and DR purposes instead of giving it damage stats that it won't use? It's similar to saying this vehicle is treated as a bicycle except that it has three wheels.

Perhaps the guy who wrote those descriptions works part time as a census taker or something....

You can use Weapon Focus (Light mace) for it.

Also, most monsters are proficient only in weapons in their stat block. I do not know any example but it is possible that some monsters are just proficient in light mace.