Staff Fighting and Dual Implement Spellcaster

[abyssaldeath]

In order to count as a staff implement, a weapon must be a quarterstaff.

The off-hand end of a quarterstaff is not, of itself, a quarterstaff. Just like the spear end of an urgrosh is not, by itself, an urgrosh.

Thus, even when weilding a quarterstaff as two weapons, you are only wielding one quarterstaff: IOW you are only wielding one Staff Implement.

If you were a Hybrid Monk, and therefore able to use any weapon (rather than just a quarterstaff) as an implement, it would work.

I was trying to stay out of it, but this is just the most ridiculous statement I've heard on this subject. The entire argument is built off of a false statement.

1: In order to count as a staff implement it has to be part of the staff group. A quarterstaff is part of the staff group and that is why it can be used as an implement.

2: Wielding double weapons is like wielding a weapon in each hand.

3: The Staff Fighting feat turns a quarterstaff into a double weapon. As a double weapon each end will be part of the staff weapon group because a quarterstaff is part of the staff group. Nothing about this feat changes that.

4: When enchanting a double weapon both ends gain all benefits of the enchantment.

Using the facts stated above it is safe to assume that when a Wizard has the Staff Fighting feat, Dual Implement Spellcaster and is wielding a quarterstaff they will get the benefit of the Dual Implement Spellcaster feat. This assumption is not a fact, but an assumption based on facts.

 

[Aulirophile]

In order to count as a staff implement, a weapon must be a quarterstaff.

The off-hand end of a quarterstaff is not, of itself, a quarterstaff. Just like the spear end of an urgrosh is not, by itself, an urgrosh.

Thus, even when weilding a quarterstaff as two weapons, you are only wielding one quarterstaff: IOW you are only wielding one Staff Implement.

If you were a Hybrid Monk, and therefore able to use any weapon (rather than just a quarterstaff) as an implement, it would work.

....

All Double Weapons, without a single exception, their primary and secondary ends both belong to the weapon groups of the primary end. So the second end of a Double Quarterstaff is a Staff. I can Wield Staffs as Implements. Done.

Do you have some personal objection to this working? Because your arguments are getting progressively stranger.

 

[CovertOps]

AN ITEM BONUS EQUAL TO ANYTHING IS NOT AN UNTYPED BONUS
Bear in mind, you just did say an item bonus was an untyped bonus... so please reconsider your point very carefully.

Sorry about that...I was looking back and forth between them all and I must have read the wrong one. What I meant was...equal to (not untyped) because it's an item bonus, but this usage clearly only refers to the quantity.

My general point is that in every instance of "enhancement bonus" it is either indicating quantity or type, but not both. I see the other side of it though. I guess my only point would be that this is just another term like "attack" which is ambiguous due to it's multiple usages.

 

[Kingreaper]

....

All Double Weapons, without a single exception, their primary and secondary ends both belong to the weapon groups of the primary end. So the second end of a Double Quarterstaff is a Staff. I can Wield Staffs as Implements. Done.

Do you have some personal objection to this working? Because your arguments are getting progressively stranger.

Perhaps I missed a rules change.

In PHB1 it is stated that a Staff Implement is a Quarterstaff Weapon.


Where is it stated that all Staff Weapons (not just Quarterstaffs) are Staff Implements?

 

[Aulirophile]

Perhaps I missed a rules change.

In PHB1 it is stated that a Staff Implement is a Quarterstaff Weapon.


Where is it stated that all Staff Weapons (not just Quarterstaffs) are Staff Implements?

Is there another kind of Staff in 4e? Nope. Is the secondary end of a Double Quarterstaff a Staff? Yep. What does the Implement Proficiency for Wizards say? Staff.

Or, to turn you argument around, where is it stated that "Staff" is not an Implement group? Because Light Blades and Heavy Blades are, for instance, Implement groups all by their lonesome, in addition to being a weapon type.

Asking the same question, do you have some personal objection to this working? "This weapon, which is a Staff, is not the right kind of Staff, even though there is only one kind of Staff" is, as I said, what your argument has slowly come to. Progressively stranger.

 

[Kingreaper]

Is there another kind of Staff in 4e? Nope.

Other than a quarterstaff? Yes, see below

Is the secondary end of a Double Quarterstaff a Staff? Yep.

Yes, it is a different staff from a quarterstaff.



Look, we know that WotC overload words. For example: Mace. My argument is based solely on RAW. Your argument requires that the word "staff" not be overloaded; that it refers to precisely one thing; a weapon-group that is also an implement-group.

Heavy Blade and Light Blade are only ever defined as Weapon Groups, so the Swordmage implement section can't refer to anything other than the weapon groups in question.

Imagine though that there was a MaceMage. They have the Mace implement. Later in the book the Mace implement is defined as being specifically only the Mace weapon, not any Mace-group weapon.
Would such a macemage be able to use a greatclub as an implement?

 

[Aulirophile]

Pfftt, your argument is based on your opinion of what the word "Staff" means. An opinion for which you have zero text support. A Staff Implement is also a Quarterstaff. Superb. A Double Weapon Quarterstaff is a Quarterstaff at both ends, assuming it functions like every other double weapon. Which, as has been pointed out to you time and again, is actually a reasonable assumption, since that is how every other item of the same type also works.

As opposed to your argument, which is that there is an unidentified mystery Staff, that is not a Staff. Right.

 

[Kingreaper]

Pfftt, your argument is based on your opinion of what the word "Staff" means. An opinion for which you have zero text support. A Staff Implement is also a Quarterstaff. Superb. A Double Weapon Quarterstaff is a Quarterstaff at both ends, assuming it functions like every other double weapon. Which, as has been pointed out to you time and again, is actually a reasonable assumption, since that is how every other item of the same type also works. .

So, when I hold an Urgrosh, I'm holding an urgrosh (a double weapon) in each hand?

 

[webrunner]

Hypothetically if the staff said that it counted as an ugrosh and not a quarterstaff, would you still consider it to count for DIS?

 

[CovertOps]

Hypothetically if the staff said that it counted as an ugrosh and not a quarterstaff, would you still consider it to count for DIS?

What possible gain could there be from this? The rules don't say this and even if we were to play along with your hypothetical, you still wouldn't be able to apply that logic back onto the Staff (weapon group)/Staff (implement)/Quarterstaff debate.

It doesn't matter what the stats are for the "off-hand end" of a quarterstaff. All that matters is that a Quarterstaff double weapon is wielded in each hand which meets the requirement for DIS since the wielded item is a Staff