Making staves useful

[mucco]

Well, I love the concept of magic users wielding powerful staves and using them in combat. Unfortunately, 3.5 staves are very very sad. I wish to change this, and I was looking with interest at PF's system.

Do you think it's portable to 3.5? Does it cause imbalances? Too strong an option for the already OP casters? Any suggestions? :smallbiggrin:

[Drelua]

Wow, I play Pathfinder but I hadn't realized staves worked any different. I don't really play casters, but having just read how they work (edit: grammatical screw-up. I mean staves, not casters.)in PF, I can't see any reason that system couldn't be brought straight into 3.5, which I played for a couple years. It's not really any more powerful, it just makes staves actually practical, instead of being so expensive that you'll almost never use them. Well, except in an epic campaign I played. We were around level 30 and the sorcerer found a new staff, so he decided to give his old staff of power to a random homeless person, but told him not to break it. My rogue then told the hobo, who it turned out was completely insane, that 'he just doesn't want you to break it so that you don't get super powers, not knowing what would happen. Then the guy yelled "Phenomenal Cosmic Power!" and broke it. I was very glad I had a high reflex save...

Sorry for getting off topic there, but I don't see anything wrong with using PF's system.

[Cruiser1]

See http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/staves for how staffs work in PF. Basically, they work the same, except have 10 charges instead of 50 (but aren't any cheaper). What you get in return is that you can recharge a staff (one charge per day) by expending your own spell slots.

That's very nice, since my biggest problem with traditional 3.5 staffs is you're spending a large amount of wealth for something that eventually runs out of charges (and has no way of recharging). I don't see any problem with porting PF staffs into a 3.5 game (even having them alongside traditional staffs), where I'd just call them "rechargeable staffs" vs. "normal staffs".

[HunterOfJello]

Quarterstaves are awesome for Druids in 3.5e once they start casting spells onto them.

Runestaves are also awesome in 3.5e for both Wizards and Sorcerers.

I'm not overly fond of general magic staves in 3.5e but I think they provide a good resource to DMs for giving out temporary benefits to players that find the partially charged staves in big piles of treasure.

[Greenish]

Quarterstaves are awesome for Druids in 3.5e once they start casting spells onto them.Shillelagh. Enjoy your +2 double greatsword.


Runestaves are pretty neat, too. DotU had a tactical feat for fighting with a magic staff.

[ericgrau]

3.5 staves are actually better because most people don't fight in too many encounters so they're a better deal overall. You don't always get downtime to recharge either. People are afraid of them because they think they're throwing their money away, but actually you'll get more spells per lifetime on the expendable given how brief and few fights are. Give staffs a try sometime, they're really quite good. Full caster level, full save DC, it's like having more spells.

Even a level 1 wizard or a DC 20 use magic device check can use them, and they have no arcane spell failure for casting in armor, so they're even better on multiclassed castsers. Your high charisma bard can say "I'm a sorcerer too. Wall of force! Evard's black tentacles! Muaahahaha.".

[Worira]

Well, making it a reach weapon that can strike adjacent would be in line with how a quarterstaff is actually used in combat. Be aware, though, that this makes them very good.

[Greenish]

Well, making it a reach weapon that can strike adjacent would be in line with how a quarterstaff is actually used in combat.Next you'll be claiming halberds should have reach or something silly like that!

[HunterOfJello]

Shillelagh. Enjoy your +2 double greatsword.



Shillelagh is pretty good.

Changestaff lets you turn your ordinary quarterstaff into a treant for hour/level. Wood Shape lets you turn a quarterstaff into pretty much freaking anything you can think of.

Finally, Spellstaff lets you turn a staff into a bonus spell slot of any level spell you can cast. Effectively, it's an extra spell slot for the highest level spell that a Druid or Archivist can cast.

[Kantolin]

Actually, a quarterstaff in combat is pretty useful for a two-weaponing rogue - it's a d6/d6 weapon, the only double weapon that doesn't require a feat, so be strength-based and go to town. It's also a weapon you can usually get by into most locations due to gandalf reasons - it's a stick.

'course, I've never completely understood the hand-and-a-half bonus you normally get for two handing a weapon with double weapons. It seems that your first swing gets str*1.5, while your offhand gets str*0.5, due to 'exactly as though weilding a one handed weapon and a light weapon', and in both cases your'e holding it in both hands (Which is unuseful for light weapons but hey), so that may tweak things. Still, 1d6/1d6 is as good as you're gonna get, and any weapon-specific feats you get apply to both ends.

Then, of course, there's the staff feat in the complete warrior, but that feat is probably suboptimal. Still, it's neat ^_^

[dextercorvia]

Actually, a quarterstaff in combat is pretty useful for a two-weaponing rogue - it's a d6/d6 weapon, the only double weapon that doesn't require a feat, so be strength-based and go to town. It's also a weapon you can usually get by into most locations due to gandalf reasons - it's a stick.

'course, I've never completely understood the hand-and-a-half bonus you normally get for two handing a weapon with double weapons. It seems that your first swing gets str*1.5, while your offhand gets str*0.5, due to 'exactly as though weilding a one handed weapon and a light weapon', and in both cases your'e holding it in both hands (Which is unuseful for light weapons but hey), so that may tweak things. Still, 1d6/1d6 is as good as you're gonna get, and any weapon-specific feats you get apply to both ends.

Then, of course, there's the staff feat in the complete warrior, but that feat is probably suboptimal. Still, it's neat ^_^

No, it is Str on 'main-hand' attack, and 0.5*Str for the 'off-hand' attack. You have to string a couple of statements together to get it, but you aren't considered two-handed when using it for TWF.

[Quietus]

Well, making it a reach weapon that can strike adjacent would be in line with how a quarterstaff is actually used in combat. Be aware, though, that this makes them very good.

I'd allow this for anyone who spent a feat on it, personally. Of course, at that point they might as well use a spiked chain.

[TwylyghT]

Shillelagh. Enjoy your +2 double greatsword.


Don't forget Spikes.

+2 enhancement to hit, Impact weapon property, and +1/level damage to a wooden weapon. Doubled up with Shillelagh a plain old stick becomes a nasty, nasty, weapon.

Though it's a lot of fun with Ironwood Scimitars/Falchions too.

[Greenish]

I'd allow this for anyone who spent a feat on it, personally. Of course, at that point they might as well use a spiked chain.Except if they're a druid. Or, say, Spirit Shaman.

I'd play that.

[Quietus]

Except if they're a druid. Or, say, Spirit Shaman.

I'd play that.

Nothing is technically stopping them from taking EWP : Spiked Chain. Though with those two, I suspect you're referring more to the aforementioned staff-buff spells, in which case yes. They would do well with that.

[mucco]

3.5 staves are actually better because most people don't fight in too many encounters so they're a better deal overall. You don't always get downtime to recharge either. People are afraid of them because they think they're throwing their money away, but actually you'll get more spells per lifetime on the expendable given how brief and few fights are. Give staffs a try sometime, they're really quite good. Full caster level, full save DC, it's like having more spells.

I guess I hadn't thought about that. Though, I think I'd use more than 50 charges during the course of a campaign (the best spells usually cost more than one charge), so I'm not sure it's actually convenient. Also, the UMD argument stands for PF staves too.

The downtime thing I see as a good thing, so one doesn't risk using only his staff to cast stuff in combat. I like a lot use/day or use/encounter mechanics though, so YMMV.

Everyone else, back on topic! How did this get to dual-wielding Str-based rogues and spiked chains? :smalltongue:

[ericgrau]

Even 17-25 spells is a bit of a stretch. The average combat lasts 5 rounds. Even if you're nothing but a staff spell slinger you're going to level up multiple times before it's gone. And it's more a matter of X charges that last as long as you'll ever need those particular spells being cheaper than a permanent item that you can't even afford.

I think what might be more flavorful than a staff that gets replaced as you need more and more new spells (heck, that's actually more likely than running out of charges), would be to allow it to be upgraded by paying the difference in crafting cost, similar to a magic weapon. Perhaps "sell" old abilities for half, putting that value towards the new ones, to represent the recycling of magical energies. Since the staff remains useful longer you might pay to recharge it later, likewise paying for the difference in charges.

[Andorax]

Eberron's Artificiers can recycle used staves.

Staffs of the Magi article from Dragon 338 is well worth looking over. Give up your familiar to grant familiaresque benefits to your "imbued" staff. There's even a feat that provides a recharge mechanic. A worthwile read for a lot of good ideas along these lines.

[klemdakherzbag]

PF Staff Magus (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateMagic/spellcastingClassOptions/magus.html) makes magic staves dual purposed as magic weapons as well as still being a magic staff. Can also recharge staff with their arcane pool points.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

I like the runestaff, because it's so much cheaper for the spells known. Sure, you burn slots, but sorcerers and focused specialists aren't too worried about that.