Staff Fighting and Dual Implement Spellcaster

[Black Knight Irios]

Take a look at the wording at the implement entry of swordmages in the FRPG. It says light blades and heavy blades. It nowhere states that this refers to the weapon group. Still everyone knows that they are weapon groups and are meant.

Wizards are proficient with staff implements. There is a staff weapon group.

Why would you assume that they are talking about a weapon group once and about something else another time?

• Staff fighting allows you to treat the quarterstaff as a double weapon.
• Both ends belong to the staff group (nowhere is said that they are in the staff group but this is a save assumption b/c there is nothing that indicates that they are not).
• You are proficient with all implements in the staff group.
• Wielding a double weapon counts as wielding a weapon in each hand.
• If a weapon group or specific weapon is identical with an implement we can use that weapon as an implement if we are proficient with that implement.
• DIS wants us to wield an implement in each hand which we are doing, we wield a weapon in each hand that is at the same time an implement.

This should work by RAW.

On a side note:
If you feel like, this is a stretch of the rules, ask yourself, is this stretch OP? If the answer is no, why don't you allow it.

 

[Kingreaper]

Take a look at the wording at the implement entry of swordmages in the FRPG. It says light blades and heavy blades. It nowhere states that this refers to the weapon group. Still everyone knows that they are weapon groups and are meant.

Indeed. Because there is no other definition of a heavy blade or light blade than as a weapon group.

Wizards are proficient with staff implements. There is a staff weapon group.

There is also a type of implement called a "staff" with it's own section of description.

Why would you assume that they are talking about a weapon group once and about something else another time?

Because in one case the only option is that they are talking about a weapon group. In the other case I have to ask: "are they talking about the weapon group or the implement type"
If the Wizard uses the Staff weapon group, then why is there a Staff implement type at all?

On a side note:
If you feel like, this is a stretch of the rules, ask yourself, is this stretch OP? If the answer is no, why don't you allow it.

If one of the players I trust with such things asked, I might let them try it. Especially if they were building something that was otherwise suboptimal.

 

[webrunner]

Why would you assume that they are talking about a weapon group once and about something else another time?

Because "Implement" and "Weapon" are not synonymous. There are cases that let you use the weapons in a weapon group as an implement. There is a case where you can use a specific implement as a specific weapon.

Implements aren't groups, they're analogous to actual weapons. A +1 quarterstaff = +1 staff, not +1 staff = +1 staff group. It's the same issue with "mace" being both a weapon and a weapon group.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

There is also a type of implement called a "staff" with it's own section of description.

Does that directly contradict what I'm saying.

Because in one case the only option is that they are talking about a weapon group. In the other case I have to ask: "are they talking about the weapon group or the implement type"

Actually you don't have to do that. They can talk about both.

If the Wizard uses the Staff weapon group, then why is there a Staff implement type at all?

To clarify things. Weapliments weren't that common in PHB1.

If one of the players I trust with such things asked, I might let them try it. Especially if they were building something that was otherwise suboptimal.

Nice to hear that.

Because "Implement" and "Weapon" are not synonymous. There are cases that let you use the weapons in a weapon group as an implement. There is a case where you can use a specific implement as a specific weapon.

Implements aren't groups, they're analogous to actual weapons. A +1 quarterstaff = +1 staff, not +1 staff = +1 staff group. It's the same issue with "mace" being both a weapon and a weapon group.

If you can use staffs as implements and something (staff fighting) says treat the quarterstaff as wielding a staff weapon in each hand. And I can use staffs as implements DIS' requirement is fulfilled.

You argue that the staff weapon group =/= staff implement. Is there anything that proves that? The light blade weapon group is identical to the light blade implement. Ask a sword mage if you don't believe me. It the very same structure with staffs.

Where is the difference in the "staff implement" or the "staff implement group". Your example proves nothing b/c there is no +1 heavy blade group. But actually this has nothing to do with the question at hand.

 

[webrunner]

You argue that the staff weapon group =/= staff implement. Is there anything that proves that? The light blade weapon group is identical to the light blade implement. Ask a sword mage if you don't believe me. It the very same structure with staffs.

Where is the difference in the "staff implement" or the "staff implement group". Your example proves nothing b/c there is no +1 heavy blade group. But actually this has nothing to do with the question at hand.

This is actually precisely what i'm saying. There is no "staff implement group". There is a "staff weapon group" and a "staff implement". That you can't get a +1 heavy blade group suggests you can't get a +1 staff weapon group either, but you can have a "+1 staff". If they were the same thing, there wouldn't be this distinction.

Individual "items", such as "longsword" or "greatspear" have their own specific stats, rules, adn such. Weapon groups, such as "spear", "light blade" contain these items. "mace", for instance, is the name of both a weapon group and a weapon: as a result you can say "I have a mace that counts as a mace" and although it sounds stupid is a statement of valid rule interactions and is not a the tautalogy it seems. The same is true for staffs: I ahve a staff that counts as a quarterstaff that is a member of the staff weapon group. That doesn't mean all members of the staff weapon group are staff implements, just the other way around.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

I ahve a staff that counts as a quarterstaff that is a member of the staff weapon group. That doesn't mean all members of the staff weapon group are staff implements, just the other way around.

And why do you assume that?
The only thing you have got is that the staff implement is treated as the specfic weapon quarterstaff if you use it as a weapon. This does not automatically mean that all other staff weapons are not staff implements.

You can turn that argument around and use it against me. That only proves that it is ambiguous.

Implement profiency staffs means at least the implement staff but can also mean the staff weapon group at the same time. And there would be nothing wrong if it did, it wouldn't be something new, it would be something that has already happened (compare w/ sword mage implements).

So as long as the one point above remains ambigue neither you nor I can prove which is right. But you should ask yourself is the staff implement more like a rod implement for a warlock or more like a light/heavy blade weaplement for a swordmage. If you conclude it is more like the latter you're welcome on my side.

 

[Kingreaper]

Does that directly contradict what I'm saying.

Yes. According to that section, all staff implements are quarterstaffs

So, syllogism time:

If all A are B
And C is not B
Then C is not A

If all staff implements are quarterstaffs
And half a quarterstaff is not a quarterstaff
Then half a quarterstaff is not a staff implement.

Is the primary end of a quarterstaff a quarterstaff? Of course not.

Is the secondary end of a quarterstaff a quarterstaff? Of course not.

So, it follows that neither of those is a staff implement.

 

[Squire James]

Here's my thoughts, starting from scratch since I don't feel like reading 6 pages on what I think is a fairly simple point.

The text of the Dual Implement Spellcaster feat specifies "a magic implement in one hand and a magic implement in the other hand". As I read it, this implies two separate objects. If one object can satisfy both conditions, then you don't even need Staff Fighting! That +1 Magic Staff is in one hand and is in the other.

Okay, let's assume the DIS feat requires two implements. The argued point, as I see it, is that the Staff Fighting feat makes it a double weapon and since a staff is also an implement it becomes a "double implement" that can trigger DIS. Well, if "double implements" existed elsewhere in the game I'd be inclined to agree. However, they don't, so I have to question whether the Staff Fighting feat bifurcates (fancy word for "divides into two") the implement as it does for the weapon. There is no language I can see in the feat that does so. The default state of the staff implement is that it's a regular weapon that can act as an implement, so in my mind all the feat does is transform the staff into a double weapon that ... acts as an implement. You still need another one for DIS.

 

[Nifft]

The text of the Dual Implement Spellcaster feat specifies "a magic implement in one hand and a magic implement in the other hand". As I read it, this implies two separate objects. If one object can satisfy both conditions, then you don't even need Staff Fighting! That +1 Magic Staff is in one hand and is in the other.

That seems to be consistent with the interpretation that the Character Builder is using, so perhaps you're on to something here.

Cheers, -- N

 

[DracoSuave]

While I don't usually like to say 'Character Builder allows it' as a basis for a ruling because of possible bugs, I will say this:

You can have a superior implement enchanted as a weapon. 'Vicious Quickbeam Staff +1' is something specifically programmed into that system. Someone had to take time to make that occur.

That said...

Alright. Here we go again.

First:

The 'staff implement' referred to in the PHB equipment section refers to two different things; the non-magical staff implement on page 221:

Arcane Implement: Wizards use orbs, staffs, or wands as focus items for their spells, while warlocks use rods or wands. Using a nonmagical implement confers no benefit. You can purchase a magic implement to gain an enhancement bonus to attack rolls and damage rolls with your arcane powers. A staff implement can also function as a quarterstaff.

This is a -very- specific item. This is not all implements that could be called 'staff.' This is a very -specific- item, listed on the adventurer's equipment list for five gold pieces. This text comes from the description of -that exact item-. It is not correct to assume that anything described as a staff is this item except for that 5 gold stick.

The other reference is:

A staff is a shaft of wood as tall or slightly taller than you are, sometimes crowned with a decorative crystal or some other arcane fetish. Fashioned either as a quarterstaff or a walking staff, it is also imbued with arcane enchantments so that you can channel your spells through it. Unlike other implements, a staff also functions as a melee weapon (treat it as a quarterstaff ). When used in melee, a staff applies its enhancement bonus and critical damage dice just as a weapon does.

This refers to the sorts of magic items called 'Staffs' that have enhancements such as Thunderwave, Ruin, etc. This heading covers all those items.

Now notice that neither heading has any text whatsoever mentioning that quarterstaffs cannot be used thusly. All you have here is all text stating that specific 'staff implements' can be treated as quarterstaffs for the purpose of melee weapon use.

Thusly, if you have the premise 'I am using a magic staff or the 5 gold stick' and the premise 'My item is a quarterstaff', then the following:

A -> B

is true.

To suggest, however, without evidence that 'My item is a quarterstaff' implies 'it is not a staff implement' does not logically follow.

A -> B =/> B -> ~A

So one needs evidence other than the above to suggest such a premise.

By the same token, A -> B does not imply B -> A either.

Thusly we need other evidence to indicate B -> A... and that evidence exists. And not just in Character builder.

First:
Quarterstaff +2 1d8 — 5 gp 4 lb. Staff —

That 'Staff' is from its weapon group, indicating that Quarterstaff is, in fact, a staff.

Continuing on, 4th edition has a design around 'specific beats general'. If you have a contradicting specific rule, you do not follow the general; by converse, if you do NOT have a contradicting specific rule, you DO follow the general.

Ignoring wizards for a moment, let's look at the swordmage's implement list:

Implements: light blades, heavy blades

This indicates that yes, weapon groups can be used to describe implements one can use. One can list weapons in the implement area and it'll totally count.

As well:

Implements: daggers, staffs

from the Sorcerer shows us again, we can have a weapon in the implement area. And there is that staff entry... so... as it's already proven implement areas can include weapons, and it is also shown there is no evidence to indicate the staff weapon group is exempted from being in the implement entry, the only cogent and rational conclusion is that the staff weapon group CAN be mentioned in implement entries, and be refered to.

On top of that....

A quarterstaff costs 5 gold and is a staff. The arcane implement staff is 5 gold and counts as a quarterstaff. They are interchangeable by any reasonable logic, and there is no evidence to indicate otherwise.... in fact, the only evidence that DOES exist on the matter indicates that they are meant to be completely interchangeable.

The only argument against it is 'I don't feel it should be that way.' Which is a legitimate reason to exclude it in a game you are running, but as an argument strictly based on 'believe' and 'emotion' has no real place in a logical debate.

But yeah. For something that is so 'obviously not the same thing' someone took a lot of time to make sure that all the magical superior implements could be either enchanted with staff enhancements or with weapon enhancements.