Shillelagh and quarterstaffs

[kreynolds]

Well, there's already Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot and Far Shot.

Not to mention Quick Draw.

That's just wrong, but it gives me an idea for yet another feat. You know, at this rate, I might have to release a free collection. I've got 14 feats already!

 

[kreynolds]

That's just wrong, but it gives me an idea for yet another feat. You know, at this rate, I might have to release a free collection. I've got 14 feats already!

Make that 16.

 

[drnuncheon]

A quarterstaff is a double-ended weapon (it has two damage ratings seperated by a slash).

A shillelagh is not a double-ended weapon (it has a single damage rating).

The spell turns the quarterstaff into a Shillelagh.

Hmm. In every other case in which it matters, double weapons are treated like two separate weapons - they must have the masterwork fee paid for each head, they must be enchanted separately, and they are treated as two weapons when they are fought with.

While your statement above is technically accurate with regards to the wording of the spell, it is not consistent with the treatment of double weapons in other cases. To be consistent, each head of the quarterstaff is treated as a separate weapon - so the shillelagh spell (and other boosting spells like magic weapon) would affect only one end of the staff. The other end is unaltered, and can still be used to attack for 1d6 damage.

This solution has the additional benefit of not incurring disbelief rolls from your players: "Gee, I just cast this spell, and now I suddenly can't attack with the other end of my quarterstaff..."

J

 

[Caliban]

Hmm. In every other case in which it matters, double weapons are treated like two separate weapons - they must have the masterwork fee paid for each head, they must be enchanted separately, and they are treated as two weapons when they are fought with.

While your statement above is technically accurate with regards to the wording of the spell, it is not consistent with the treatment of double weapons in other cases. To be consistent, each head of the quarterstaff is treated as a separate weapon - so the shillelagh spell (and other boosting spells like magic weapon) would affect only one end of the staff. The other end is unaltered, and can still be used to attack for 1d6 damage.

This solution has the additional benefit of not incurring disbelief rolls from your players: "Gee, I just cast this spell, and now I suddenly can't attack with the other end of my quarterstaff..."

J

If it was still a quarterstaff, that would seem odd. But they instead have a shillelagh, which is an actual weapon. It's a walking stick with a club-like knot on one end.

 

[drowdude]

A quarterstaff is a double-ended weapon (it has two damage ratings seperated by a slash).

A shillelagh is not a double-ended weapon (it has a single damage rating).

The spell turns the quarterstaff into a Shillelagh.

I hate to disagree here, but infering how a spell works from the title is kinda silly.

The spell says it affects a oak cudgel or an unshod quaterstaff. It makes no specific mention of how the quaterstaff must be weilded in conjunction with the spell, nor does it specifically state that it affects only one end of the staff.

But yeah, you can interpet it that way if you want to unnecesarily restrict the spell's usefulness.

 

[Caliban]

I hate to disagree here, but infering how a spell works from the title is kinda silly.

The spell says it affects a oak cudgel or an unshod quaterstaff. It makes no specific mention of how the quaterstaff must be weilded in conjunction with the spell, nor does it specifically state that it affects only one end of the staff.

But yeah, you can interpet it that way if you want to unnecesarily restrict the spell's usefulness.

I'd rather do that than accept the interpretation that one casting of the spell makes a quarterstaff into a 1d10/1d10 +1 weapon. (Using the reasoning that a quarterstaff is "a weapon" even if it is a double weapon.)

So in any game I run, you cast shillelagh, but you just get a +1 weapon that does 1d10+1 damage. It does not turn a quarterstaff into a double bastardsword.

 

[drnuncheon]

If it was still a quarterstaff, that would seem odd. But they instead have a shillelagh, which is an actual weapon. It's a walking stick with a club-like knot on one end.

This may sound nitpicky, but the spell does not say that it changes the shape of the weapon at all, nor does it say that it changes the weapon into a shillelagh. The name of the spell cannot be taken as evidence of any transformation, since it could just as easily be called 'shillelagh' because druids cast it on their shillelaghs (stats as club).

If the spell truly altered the shape of the weapon, I would expect to see full stats for it, including size and damage type, or at least a 'you wield this weapon as a scimitar' like we get for flame blade. Since none of this is present, I think that the spell is - like the other weapon-boosting Transmutation spells - simply added effectiveness and not any change in shape to the weapon itself.

J

 

[Caliban]

This may sound nitpicky, but the spell does not say that it changes the shape of the weapon at all, nor does it say that it changes the weapon into a shillelagh. The name of the spell cannot be taken as evidence of any transformation, since it could just as easily be called 'shillelagh' because druids cast it on their shillelaghs (stats as club).

Your right, that is nitpicky.

What I take as evidence of transformation is the fact that:

A) It's a transformation spell.
B) It states that the quarterstaff or club "...becomes a weapon... that deals 1d10 points of damage..."

Since it doesn't become a weapon that deals 1d10/1d10 points of damage, I can only assume that what it becomes is a single weapon.

I play a druid (Cletus, the 1/2 orc druid), and I use shillelagh all the time. I see no need for it to create a +1 double bastard sword with a 1st level spell.

 

[drnuncheon]

I'd rather do that than accept the interpretation that one casting of the spell makes a quarterstaff into a 1d10/1d10 +1 weapon. (Using the reasoning that a quarterstaff is "a weapon" even if it is a double weapon.)

So in any game I run, you cast shillelagh, but you just get a +1 weapon that does 1d10+1 damage. It does not turn a quarterstaff into a double bastardsword.

I agree that the 'double bastardsword' (+1 bastard sword no less!) is excessive. On the other hand, showing the staff a little love isn't that bad, since otherwise you have staff users getting a 2-handed shillelagh and club users getting an equally effective one-handed shillelagh - I hardly think a 1d10+1/1d6 weapon is going to break the game.

What do you do with magic weapon and greater magic weapon with regards to double weapons? Do you let them double-dip by affecting both heads?

J

(edit: clarified my point just a bit)

 

[KarinsDad]

The "damage rolls" is part of the +1 enhancement clause.

Broken down properly, it reads:

"...becomes a weapon with a +1 enhancement to attack and damage rolls..."

and

"...becomes a weapon that deals 1d10 points of damage..."

Ok, fine. We'll break it down your way.

The phrase "a quarterstaff is a weapon that deals 1D6 points of damage when the character wields it" does not conflict with the D6/D6 damage in the chart or the definition of quarterstaff being a double weapon. It merely states what the damage will be, not whether or not it is a double weapon.

Ditto for the phrase "...becomes a weapon that deals 1d10 points of damage when the character wields it".

The phrase "when the character wields it" does not imply single weapon use either.

Since the phrase that you yourself broke down into its component parts is just as valid for both types of weapons (single and double) and it does not explicitly state that it changes it to a single weapon, it must not.

waits patiently as the ball crosses the net...

While your statement above is technically accurate with regards to the wording of the spell, it is not consistent with the treatment of double weapons in other cases. To be consistent, each head of the quarterstaff is treated as a separate weapon - so the shillelagh spell (and other boosting spells like magic weapon) would affect only one end of the staff. The other end is unaltered, and can still be used to attack for 1d6 damage.

I seem to recall having the Magic Weapon cast on a double weapon discussion a long time ago. Did the Sage rule on the side of having to cast the spell on both ends to make them both magical?

Although I understand the balance rationale for permanent magical weapons, that really doesn't apply that much to double weapons for spells since double weapons are basically shafted (3 feats vs. 2 feats for all but quarterstaff) in the first place (compared to two weapon fighting with the possible exception of the Orc Double Axe). Or, another disadvantage of double weapons, a Sundered double weapon is still sundered and totally unusable (or at least there are no rules which allow you to use it as two single weapons, although that happens in the movies).