| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1Coredump00Sep 27, 2014 10:28:06 | So, does anyone know the reason or logic for a quarterstaff to qualify as a single-hand weapon?
I'm not ever sure if Bruce Lee could be dangerous with a single handed quarterstaff attack....
And being able to use Quarterstaff to strike twice with Polearm master.... in one hand.... ?? I get that 'rules are rules'.... but this seems a bit much.
|
| #2GentlemanLoserSep 27, 2014 10:30:05 | If it wasn't 1H, you couldn't have Gandalf...
(In all seriousness, to actually use in combat it sould have been 2H) |
| #3UndrhilSep 27, 2014 11:44:19 | I think this is a carry-over from 4e, where Quarterstaffs were two-handed weapons and small creatures couldn't wield two-handed weapons; so, they gave Quarterstaff the Small keyword.
I meant heavy. |
| #4RCanineSep 27, 2014 11:27:45 |
|
| (Reply to #4)Undrhil |
|
| #6FluffyBunbunKittensSep 27, 2014 11:48:00 | Yeah, shield+quarterstaff+polearm master (strike them with both ends, twirl it!) is a silly, silly combo. But perfectly rules-legal. |
| #7JRutterbushSep 27, 2014 12:56:29 | A quarterstaff can be used in one hand for the same reason a spear can be used in one hand: thrusting. You can thrust a quarterstaff just like a spear, only with a blunt head. |
| (Reply to #7)Coredump00 |
|
| #9Demosthenes2054Sep 27, 2014 13:31:46 | Quarterstaves can be nasty even one-handed and I can see them being used with a shield. What I can't grasp is being able to change the momentum on them quickly to get the blunt thrust attack without using both hands.
RAW it works and the munchkin in me gets awfully excited about playing one. But I'm sure the novelty of it would wear off after a session or two. Too gamey for my tastes. |
| (Reply to #9)SteveMND |
|
| (Reply to #10)Coredump00 |
|
| #12Athinar1Oct 01, 2014 17:59:16 | The guy that made the rule is 7 feet 6 inches and uses the Staff one hand, my guess |
| #13AaronOfBarbariaOct 01, 2014 19:12:02 | ...it seems like people need to watch more "kung fu" movies - a staff being a one-handed weapon was a moment where I looked at it and said "Good. It's about time." |
| #14DireachOct 01, 2014 19:27:37 | A quarterstaff (or at least a bo staff) can be used very effectively one-handed, especially for savagely punching an opponent unexpectedly in the face with the butt end.
Using a quarterstaff one-handed with a shield to get a bonus attack from Polearm Master, though, is the richest, creamiest form of cheese. I would never allow it in my game, even if Mike Mearls came to the door and told my group it was OK. |
| #15Captain_KoboldOct 02, 2014 2:58:18 | Its possible that they are also including shorter sticks like walking sticks etc into the "quarterstaff" category. Obviously a singlestick or hanbo would be usable on one hand, whereas a traditional 5lb English quarterstaff wouldn't.
Or they just saw Gandalf flailing around with one in one hand and thought that it would be a good idea for PCs. |
| (Reply to #14)SteveMND |
|
| #17DireachOct 02, 2014 8:11:47 | I wish I could point you to some resources, Steve. I've seen it demonstrated in person, with a bo staff, and also with a broomstick (demonstrating how common items could serve as emergency defensive weapons).
Your point is well taken, that a traditional English quarterstaff is not very much like a bo staff, let alone a six-foot gnarled wizard's staff. The rules for "quarterstaff" in the game cover every kind of battle-stick, though, so here we are.
I'd certainly permit a player to use a one-handed staff with a shield if they wanted to strike with it, or stab with it. But no way on Earth would I let them use the butt-end to attack if they were holding it in one hand. There's no leverage, no power, and you'd probably get your staff ripped out of your hand (and possibly break your wrist). This is definitely a case where GM good sense has to override RAW. |
| (Reply to #17)SteveMND | Yeah, fair enough, thanks anyway on the examples. Like you said, the new weapons are really broad, it seems, compared to earlier versions. Which is kinda nice, as I always envisioned my old 3.x ranseur fighter as having more of a wire-fu chinese fighting style with his anyway, even if technically it was probably more of the standard european fighting styles they had envisioned when they made the weapon stats.
|
| #19superknudOct 02, 2014 9:47:23 |
|
| (Reply to #17)Timborama |
|
| #21DireachOct 02, 2014 10:57:28 | I could potentially be persuaded by the "double tap" interpretation. But my players don't think like this, and I'll never have to rule on it in the first place, so it's a moot point for me. |
| #22RCanineOct 02, 2014 11:15:25 | I don't think it would be a bad idea to house-rule the quarterstaff to be a two-handed finesse weapon that does 1d6 damage. I think that solves a lot of these problems, and it opens up some design space that is closed right now. |
| #23DireachOct 02, 2014 12:47:20 |
|
| #24Captain_KoboldOct 02, 2014 13:09:22 |
|
| (Reply to #24)Timborama |
|
| #26DireachOct 02, 2014 14:30:36 | I don't think a d6 two-handed finesse weapon is going to cause anyone headaches, but unless one of my players pleads for it (which is unlikely), I'm not gonna worry about whatever possible munchkin horrors it might unleash. It's down to each individual DM to reign in munchkinism in their games; I wouldn't let fear of rules abuse stop me from making a weapon that seemed fair and was going to be used in good faith. For what it's worth, I wouldn't allow it to be used with Great Weapon Master. |
| (Reply to #26)DracoSuave |
|
| #28DireachOct 02, 2014 18:12:22 | Rcanine and I were speaking of a possible alternate version that is d6 two-handed finesse, not versatile. If d6 is as good as it gets, it's not going to suddenly become the go-to finesse weapon. |
| #29RCanineOct 02, 2014 20:15:55 |
|
| #30DireachOct 02, 2014 21:40:47 | The only wrinkle that comes to mind is shillelagh: now you have a 1d8 two-handed finesse weapon (even if the butt end is still 1d4). Even still I don't think it becomes staggeringly powerful, and the feat investment is heavy (Polearm Master, Great Weapon Master, and Magic Initiate unless you're a druid, Nature cleric, or possibly warlock). |
| #31TimboramaOct 03, 2014 5:37:27 | Well, as long as it doesn't get the "Heavy" property I think it can be somewhat safe from craziness ^_^ |
| (Reply to #29)DracoSuave |
|
| #33PolarisOct 04, 2014 8:40:42 | "Two Handed" == "Heavy" in 5e and I'd be really, really leery of making ANY such weapon with the finesse property even with a low (d6) damage dice. It opens up Greatweapon Master + Polearm Mastery to finesse characters and removes pretty much the last (and arguably best) reason to have a strength based combatant. [Because most of the damage won't come from damage dice but from bonus damage....and shillelagh fixes the damage dice.]
-Polaris |
| (Reply to #33)AaronOfBarbaria |
|