PDA

View Full Version : Quarterstaff Rogue



Human Paragon 3
2007-09-26, 10:38 PM
I was trolling the forums a while ago and somebody was talking about a quarterstaff rogue, and that really piqued my interest. Bare with me:

1) Quarterstaff is a simple weapon, hence the rogue is proficient in it
2) It's the ONLY simple weapon that is also a double weapon
3) The great thing about equipping a TWF rogue with a double weapon, is that when you can't make that full attack, you get x1.5 your str bonus and your full attack bonus instead of -2 to each attack, making you more likely to hit. When you can pull off the full attack, you get sneak attack to every hit (supposing the enemy is flat footed).
4) The image of the simple, wandering rogue defending himself with a quarterstaff and OWNING ASS with multiple sneak attacks is just sweet.

Given those four pluses, Fighter and Monk are both out of the mix, since they defeat the purpose of the concept- they have much better options open to them. So I ask you, gentle forum, what is the best way to put together this character that exploits all four (OK, all three) of these factors? All books allowed except TOB, but Core, Complete Warrior and Complete Adventurer are favorites of mine.

kpenguin
2007-09-26, 10:42 PM
Keep back-up daggers. You can't have a cold iron or silver quarterstaff and daggers are really easy to hide on your body.

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-26, 10:45 PM
The only real hurdle I see with this is that you can't finesse a quarterstaff, so you will have a higher strength than is normal on a rogue. Which will either hurt your skills or your AC, because you have to pull those points from somewhere, likely intelligence or dexterity. Pretty much, you are increasing your MAD by adding strength as an attribute that you need.

Dr. Weasel
2007-09-26, 10:47 PM
I think the standard TWF feat line combined with Daring Outlaw would be the best use. (It would provide maximum bonus damage, no?)


Of course the intent of that would just be emulation of the Sneak Attack fighter...

Icewalker
2007-09-26, 11:03 PM
This idea is AWESOME. Yoink, probably. (From whoever you got it from, I suppose)

Leon
2007-09-26, 11:20 PM
its a bit feat fidly but the Quick Staff Style from Complete Warrior is a favourite of mine.
-1 Attack for +3 AC, take that to extremes and have +15 AC (more if you have improved Combat Expertise)

Lemur
2007-09-26, 11:27 PM
its a bit feat fidly but the Quick Staff Style from Complete Warrior is a favourite of mine.
-1 Attack for +3 AC, take that to extremes and have +15 AC (more if you have improved Combat Expertise)

Quick Staff doesn't triple the AC, it just gives an extra +2 when you use expertise. So if you took -5 to attack, you'd get +7 AC.

Human Paragon 3
2007-09-26, 11:33 PM
Hm, not bad ideas. A front-line rogue certainly needs the AC bonus. Eventually getting Improved Two-Weapon Defense will add another +2, +3 when fighting defensively.

Hawriel
2007-09-26, 11:38 PM
A friend of mine made a paladin that faught with a quarterstaff. Her choice. That character really kicked butt.

Silver and cold iron are no problem with staves. They often had the ends capped in metal to prevent splitting.

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-26, 11:40 PM
From SRD:
Items without metal parts cannot be made from cold iron. An arrow could be made of cold iron, but a quarterstaff could not

[...]

The alchemical silvering process can’t be applied to nonmetal items

Stupid minimum character limit

Human Paragon 3
2007-09-26, 11:42 PM
I think some home brewing might be in order to create the demon/devil slaying quarterstaff.

Leon
2007-09-27, 12:47 AM
in regard to the nonmetal issue: Ironwood Staff


Quick Staff doesn't triple the AC, it just gives an extra +2 when you use expertise. So if you took -5 to attack, you'd get +7 AC.

Well that makes it much less interesting, sigh....

CockroachTeaParty
2007-09-27, 12:48 AM
A homebrew feat that allows a rogue to finesse with a quarterstaff wouldn't be too terribly outside the realm of possibility, methinks. It is a fairly sweet idea, though. Anything with a quarterstaff (or a buck and a quarter staff) is awesome.

TheOOB
2007-09-27, 12:54 AM
A homebrew feat that allows a rogue to finesse with a quarterstaff wouldn't be too terribly outside the realm of possibility, methinks. It is a fairly sweet idea, though. Anything with a quarterstaff (or a buck and a quarter staff) is awesome.

Alternitivly a +1 weapon enhancement that makes it use dex for attack and damage wouldn't be too unrealistic.

Rad
2007-09-27, 01:47 AM
Alternitivly a +1 weapon enhancement that makes it use dex for attack and damage wouldn't be too unrealistic.

+1 for dex to attack AND damage? looks cheap.

tannish2
2007-09-27, 02:59 AM
cool idea, i had a character like this onece, of course, he abused the true pwnage of staves with his high use magic device and a wizard with the "craft staff" feat. he had more than 1 of course. i never thought of using them like normal damage-doing weapon staves though, but technically the cost of a masterwork quarterstaff is added to all the magic staff prices in the DMG...(i think) so while your at it cheese out with the best buffs of each class, by finding a high level mystic theurge with the craft staff feat.

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-27, 04:04 AM
Ironwood Staff

Huh? how does casting ironwood on a wooden staff help you make it cold iron or silver? The spell is called ironwood, not coldironwood or silverwood.

I think you can bypass silver DR with a staff via silversheen, though. Adamantine and Cold Iron will be a problem. But then again, most things with X/Adam DR are going to be a problem for a rogue anyway, and a pair of cold iron daggers are really cheap, and the party mage can GMW when necessary.

Edit- you could also try to get a surestriking(?) staff. I don't remember if it made it into 3.5 or not though. Then you just bypass DR.

Fizban
2007-09-27, 04:21 AM
Heck, the greatclub is made of wood, and there's an adamantine great club in some WoTC example character. Because it has *gasp* metal on the end. Besides, it's not like it's overpowered.

There really needs to be a feat to let you actually do cool stuff with a quarterstaff. Of course, a lot of it stems from the fact that two-weapon fighting sucks so bad, but that's not changing any time soon. The quick staff feat's pretty cool, but you still have to take a penalty, and it has more prerequisites than a rogue should be taking IIRC.

Kurald Galain
2007-09-27, 04:29 AM
Of course, a lot of it stems from the fact that two-weapon fighting sucks so bad, but that's not changing any time soon.

Isn't there some semi-common houserule feat that allows you two attacks as a standard action, one with each weapon?

Moral Wiz
2007-09-27, 04:32 AM
I remember Mongoose came out with basic stats for a metal staff

Am I allowed to post them? If not, complete monk is the book you want.

Moral Wiz; master of obscure third party creations.

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-27, 04:37 AM
Two Weapon Fighting doesn't suck, at least not for rogues. A rogue actually doubles his damage output from 2WF, unlike fighters and rangers.

Jack Mann
2007-09-27, 04:47 AM
Right. It's good if you can get a source of bonus damage like sneak attack. The problem for a long time was that rogue was about the only class that could do TWF well, since there weren't many other sources of bonus damage. Nowadays there are a lot more choices (like swashbuckler, swordsage, warblade, etc.) that can do reasonably well at it. Fighters, of course, are still pretty useless at TWF without some multiclassing.

Driderman
2007-09-27, 04:53 AM
Paying a +1 enchantment for letting a Quarterstaff be Weapon Finesse-able doesn't sound too overpowered as far as I see it. Also, despite what the books say and as someone else already mentioned, Quarterstaffs were frequently metal-capped. I'm sure any reasonable DM wouldn't mind if that metal was silver or adamantium or whatever, as long as you pay for it

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-27, 05:03 AM
I'm sure any reasonable DM wouldn't mind if that metal was silver or adamantium or whatever, as long as you pay for it

I was just pointing out that by RAW, you couldn't, and thus it is something you would have to convince your DM of. I personally wouldn't allow an adamantium-tipped staff to count for anything, because it doesn't make sense to me. Cold Iron and Silver tipped I would allow, becuase that DR is based on those materials being mystically significant, as opposed to any physical quality of the metal.

I would also never allow a solid-metal staff, unless the character wielding it had at least an 18 strength. But that is just my real-world experience with staves butting in on game mechanics- even a staff made of a good, solid wood can get heavy (I in fact have a such a staff for purposes of strength training). One made of metal would be rediculous to try and wield as anything but a big club.

But that is just me.

Overlard
2007-09-27, 05:15 AM
The Finesse handicap is pretty much the only flaw in the plan (it's an idea I've had for a while too).

If you want, you can have a high Str instead of Dex, but that leaves you with having to meet the 2WF criteria with a secondary (or even tertiary if you're an intelligence/charisma-based rogue) ability.

A feat to finesse the primary end of the staff would be great, but I've also been trying to get my DM to allow that for a spear, so I doubt I'll get lucky...

Leon
2007-09-27, 05:25 AM
My mistake on ironwood, functions differently to what i thought it did

simple fix would be to just ask your DM if the staff can be banded in the metal of the type your after

in regard to Finessing - hardened Balsawood should be light enough :tongue:

appending_doom
2007-09-27, 05:30 AM
Paying a +1 enchantment for letting a Quarterstaff be Weapon Finesse-able doesn't sound too overpowered as far as I see it. Also, despite what the books say and as someone else already mentioned, Quarterstaffs were frequently metal-capped. I'm sure any reasonable DM wouldn't mind if that metal was silver or adamantium or whatever, as long as you pay for it

Eberron has a Finesse weapon ability (allowing you to finesse a light weapon, spiked chain, etc), but that costs +3. Being able to finesse a weapon that you normally can't finesse with ought to be more significant than that.

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-27, 05:37 AM
As a DM, I would allow an ultralight staff, made from say, darkwood, to be finessable, but you would not be able to apply your strength bonus to damage when finessing.

Driderman
2007-09-27, 05:53 AM
Eberron has a Finesse weapon ability (allowing you to finesse a light weapon, spiked chain, etc), but that costs +3. Being able to finesse a weapon that you normally can't finesse with ought to be more significant than that.

+3??? Holy....

I'd be prepared to accept +2, maybe. But +3, thats too much. I mean, you can get +1d6 damage of your choice of type for a +1 modifier. Why should replacing your strength with your dexterity be so much more expensive?

Overlard
2007-09-27, 06:25 AM
+3??? Holy....
No, Holy is +2.

I think that finesse ability effectively gives you the feat Weapon Finesse with a weapon that can be finessed anyway if you had the feat. I'd say that if you had the feat already, then allowing a non-finessable weapon to be finessed would have a much lower cost. +1, or +2 at a maximum.

However, if you wanted to add dexterity to your damage, as well as/instead of your strength, as well as getting dex to hit, then that would be a very powerful item. I'd price that at +3 at least.

Person_Man
2007-09-27, 10:06 AM
Melee Rogues generally have a hard time compared to other builds. They lack bonus feats, but generally want TWF, which is feat intensive. TWF precludes the use of reach weapons, which makes it somewhat more difficult to get full attacks every round, and limits their ability to use battlefield control tactics. They have d6 hit dice and mediocre AC. They have a touch of MAD (Str, Dex, Con, Int). Sneak Attack has a much slower damage progression then Power Attack/Leap Attack/Shock Trooper, and it can't be multiplied (via critical hits, Headlong Rush, Rhino Rush, Spirited Charge, etc). And its somewhat problematic to qualify for Sneak Attack every round, especially against certain types of enemies.

Are you wedded to using a Rogue, or do you simply want a quarterstaff wielding guy? What exactly do you want out of this concept?

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-27, 10:16 AM
But melee rogues have an advantage over those uber power attack builds- they are actually useful outside of combat.

Hunter Noventa
2007-09-27, 10:19 AM
Another way to deal with DR is to get the Transmuting enchant out of the MIC. It's only a +2 if I recall and eliminates all DR issues.

Person_Man
2007-09-27, 10:41 AM
But melee rogues have an advantage over those uber power attack builds- they are actually useful outside of combat.

I'm not comparing Rogues to uber Power Attack builds. I'm comparing melee Rogues to melee builds in general.

Rogues get:

1) Trapfinding and Trapsense
2) Plenty of Skills and a great Skill list
3) Sneak Attack
4) Evasion
5) Uncanny Dodge/Improved Uncanny Dodge
6) Special Abilities

2 though 6 are all combat related (except for the Skill Mastery special ability). And while they're certainly helpful in combat, they're not particularly great for melee combat when compared to the special abilities of other builds.

You can replicate Trapfinding with a Find Traps spell, a Wand of Find Traps, or 1 level dip in any class or PrC with Trapfinding. Trapsense is a joke. And Skills can be attained through a dip into a Skill Monkey class and the Able Learner feat.

For example, a Human Factotum 1/Warblade X with Able Learner and high Int will do far better in melee combat then a Rogue X+1, and he'll be quite useful outside of combat as well. The Rogue will have more Skill points, and that's good. But a player doesn't need to have Skills in everything. He just needs to divvy up the various Skills with his party, and be good at some of them.

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-27, 11:08 AM
Comparing Rogue to ToB isn't really fair. Especially since the gaming community is pretty divided on whether or not ToB was a good idea.

don't believe me, start a thread and watch it explode.

Draz74
2007-09-27, 12:00 PM
You can replicate Trapfinding with a Find Traps spell, a Wand of Find Traps, or 1 level dip in any class or PrC with Trapfinding. Trapsense is a joke. And Skills can be attained through a dip into a Skill Monkey class and the Able Learner feat.

For example, a Human Factotum 1/Warblade X with Able Learner and high Int will do far better in melee combat then a Rogue X+1, and he'll be quite useful outside of combat as well. The Rogue will have more Skill points, and that's good. But a player doesn't need to have Skills in everything. He just needs to divvy up the various Skills with his party, and be good at some of them.

What if you don't want to be Human?

What if Races of Destiny (or Tome of Battle or Dungeonscape) isn't allowed in your campaign (or isn't even accessible to your group)?

What if your party is mostly low-skill builds, so they really do want you, as the skill monkey, to cover "skills in everything" (or at least, a lot of things)?

What if it's a campaign with a lot more puzzles and social encounters, and less combat?

What if you just like the style of actually having a character that's good at a lot of things, especially outside of combat? There's a flavor that a Wand of Trap Finding just doesn't duplicate, IMHO.

In many campaigns, there's a real niche for a real skill monkey, which you seem to completely overlook in your argument here.

Person_Man
2007-09-27, 12:20 PM
Comparing Rogue to ToB isn't really fair. Especially since the gaming community is pretty divided on whether or not ToB was a good idea.

don't believe me, start a thread and watch it explode.

OK, how about comparing a Rogue to a Ranger. Rangers are core, and they're generally considered a weak class. Compared to a Rogue, the Ranger gets full BAB, slightly more hit points, an animal companion, spells, some helpful bonus feats, and comparable special abilities.

With Improved Unarmed Strike (or Oversized Two Weapon Fighting or any natural claw attack), a Ranger can apply Power Attack to every attack he makes. He can get Pounce with a 2nd level Ranger Spell (Spell Compendium). Power Attack, Leap Attack, and Shock Trooper aren't difficult for him to get since he gets TWF for free. And since he has full BAB, they're quite effective for him to use. And he has his animal companion to help out, to the extent that it can (not much, but hey, a meatshield is a meatshield).

So, with limited and generally universally accepted supplements, the Ranger is more effective in melee then the Rogue.

The Rogue has the advantages of Trapfinding, 2 more Skill points per level, and a few more Skills on his list (including UMD, which is in fact a pretty huge advantage). If the Ranger really wants those things (presumably because there's no other Skill Monkey in the party, like a Beguiler, Factotum, or Psychic Rogue) he can dip one level into Rogue or something similar, and take the Able Learner feat.

I love the Rogue. The Rogue is fun to play, and it has great fluff. My favorite PC of all time was actually a Scout, which is even weaker then the Rogue. But I think its clear that from a purely crunch perspective, Rogues aren't particularly great at melee combat compared to other melee builds. And if you want to be useful outside of combat, you need not be a Rogue and sacrifice your Skills to do so.

So, if you want a quarterstaff TWF Rogue, that's fine. If your DM is playing Core only, or if you don't want to play a human for fluff reasons, that's ok too. Just understand that you'll be weaker then most other melee builds under most normal circumstances, and that you can be useful outside of combat without being a dedicated Rogue.

daggaz
2007-09-27, 01:09 PM
As to the metal Quarterstaff, not only is it against RAW, but my homebrew sense of balance (which amazingly my players seem to agree with immediately, even our last DM would often shoot me a questioning look, hoping for an OK when he made a quick call on some wierd question) wants to say, ooops, sorry, its a lot heavier now. Even if you have the strength to handle it, it is no longer a simple weapon, because it still takes a lot more thought and control to wield effectively and safely.

Human Paragon 3
2007-09-27, 03:48 PM
OK. How would you make the Quarterstaff Ranger? Bonus points for a build that subs out animal companion, cause I hates the pets.

Edit: The ranger has much better options in general than the quarter staff, being able to use swords and stuff, but at least he gets to add favored enemy damage in with his quarterstaff attacks.

goat
2007-09-27, 04:13 PM
I've said it before, I'll say it again.

Iron-wood War-didgerdioo.

Dr. Weasel
2007-09-27, 04:16 PM
Well, everyone has better options (beside the Druid), which is a good portion of why the quarterstaff rarely sees play. (By the way, Monk AC/Ranger Favored Enemy Druid works pretty well Quarterstaff-wise, especially if you can double-variant some Rage in there)

I would imagine a quarterstaff Ranger to be a charge build with the two-weapon fighting Combat Style, probably taking Swift Tracker at higher levels.

Fizban
2007-09-27, 04:35 PM
Two Weapon Fighting doesn't suck, at least not for rogues. A rogue actually doubles his damage output from 2WF, unlike fighters and rangers.
What I meant was mostly the lack of parrying mechanics. Most of the fantasy reading I've done has the quarterstaff as good because a trained wielder can block blows better than one can with a sword, and the two ends let you catch your opponent off guard when you attack. The second is modeled well enough with the second attack from TWF, but for parrying there's no advantage. Two weapon defense can be used with any pair of weapons and sucks anyway, and quick staff has too many prerequisites, and will put an extra penalty on your attacks over the TWF penalty. But that's what I get for reading Wheel of Time.

Of course my original post contained nothing of this, so it's perfectly acceptable that you didn't address what I meant, since I didn't say what I meant.

Runolfr
2007-09-27, 04:42 PM
I wonder if this is a good concept for an Ascetic Rogue. Your Monk levels get you Flurry with the quarterstaff, so you can get an extra attack without too much BAB loss, and you don't have to have a super-high Dex. You can even take Power Attack and use the staff as a two-handed weapon to get the max benefit from it. Your rogue levels also let you get all your Sneak Attack damage if you can catch an opponent flat-footed or flanked. You won't have the BAB of a Fighter, but you'll be able to lay on a lot of damage in the right circumstances.

Human Paragon 3
2007-09-27, 07:19 PM
That's actually not a bad idea. Delivering a stunning fist through your quarterstaff than following up with multiple sneak attacks doesn't sound too bad either. It kind of defeats the purpose of the quarter staff's versatility, since you'll get more bang for your buck out just making unarmed strikes, though. Is there any advantage for a monk to use a quarter staff rather than unarmed strikes?

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-27, 10:38 PM
Rangers are core, and they're generally considered a weak class.

I have yet to hear this come up in conversation (at least, not since 3.5).

Personally, I see rogue and ranger as the only two 'good' classes out there. 'Good' in this case being defined as 'does everything the class advertises without overshadowing the other party members'. Barbarian is close to this standard as well, but conversations about barbarians seem to quickly turn into conversations about uber power attack stacking combos.

Monk, fighter, and paladin fail on the first count, while the spellcasting classes fail on the second. Bard comes close to that standard as well.


Maybe I'm just biased. I did play a level 20 ranger in 3.0, after all.

Person_Man
2007-09-27, 10:39 PM
OK. How would you make the Quarterstaff Ranger? Bonus points for a build that subs out animal companion, cause I hates the pets.

Edit: The ranger has much better options in general than the quarter staff, being able to use swords and stuff, but at least he gets to add favored enemy damage in with his quarterstaff attacks.

Well, quarterstaff is just not a great weapon. But if you're wedded to a build around it, then maybe:

Orc Ranger 11/Ronin 2/Fighter 2

Complete Champion variant: Give up Animal Companion, gain 1/4 your Ranger lever as a bonus on Handle Animal, Knowledge (nature), Listen, Search, Spot, and Survival checks, and gain the ability to cast commune with nature once per day. And/or give up spells, gain bonus feats from a limited list at 4th, 8th, 11th, and 14th levels.

Feats: Exotic Weapon Prof (Bastard Sword), Dodge, Karmic Strike, Headlong Rush (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20030301a), Craven (Champions of Ruin), Double Hit (Miniatures Handbook), Combat Reflexes.

Bonus feats: Track, Endurance, TWF, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Improved TWF, Greater TWF, Improved Favored Enemy.

Basically a modified King of Smack. Make a Headlong Rush. Dump your AC and gain a +1 damage per BAB from your Ronin ability. Gain +1 damage per character level from Ronin if they qualify for Sneak Attack. Headlong Rush doubles all of your damage. Headlong Rush also provokes also provokes an AoO from everyone along the way, including your target. Thanks to double hit, every time you make an AoO you actually attack twice, and each of the attacks has its damage doubled because its part of a Headlong Rush. Also, maybe your target is your Favored Enemy, which means you'll deal an even bigger pile of damage. If you can't charge, you still get 6 attacks per round and have Karmic Strike and Double Hit, so you'll be fine.

Be sure to buy a vampiric weapon or something similar that heals you, or learn to Tumble away quickly.

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-27, 10:48 PM
AoO don't normally gain the benefits of charging. Headlong Rush doesn't modify this. Is there something else in there that makes AoO count as part of your charge?

Hawriel
2007-09-27, 10:58 PM
Quote:
From SRD:
Items without metal parts cannot be made from cold iron. An arrow could be made of cold iron, but a quarterstaff could not

[...]

The alchemical silvering process can’t be applied to nonmetal items


Stupid minimum character limit

I fail to see how this negates my suggestion. A quarterstaff with metal caps on the ends has metal parts. Make the metal caps out of cold iron or silver stick them on a staff. There you go. As long as your beating a demon with an item made with cold iron Im sure the critter does not care of its a dagger, mace or a freakin candle stick or muffin tin. Cold iron is cold iron. Besides all an arrow is, is a stick with a metal cap on the end yet they would work.

JaxGaret
2007-09-27, 11:08 PM
That's actually not a bad idea. Delivering a stunning fist through your quarterstaff than following up with multiple sneak attacks doesn't sound too bad either. It kind of defeats the purpose of the quarter staff's versatility, since you'll get more bang for your buck out just making unarmed strikes, though. Is there any advantage for a monk to use a quarter staff rather than unarmed strikes?

That does sound pretty neat.

One advantage you get wielding a quarterstaff over going US is that you get 1.5x Str damage on a single attack if you can't full-attack that round, which may or may not be a big difference.

Tengu
2007-09-27, 11:25 PM
As to the metal Quarterstaff, not only is it against RAW, but my homebrew sense of balance (which amazingly my players seem to agree with immediately, even our last DM would often shoot me a questioning look, hoping for an OK when he made a quick call on some wierd question) wants to say, ooops, sorry, its a lot heavier now. Even if you have the strength to handle it, it is no longer a simple weapon, because it still takes a lot more thought and control to wield effectively and safely.

So, what exactly is so unbalancing in allowing quarterstaves to have tips made from various metals? Only the tips, mind you, not the whole staff.


I have yet to hear this come up in conversation (at least, not since 3.5).


I think that ranger is one of the second weakest core class. First is monk, of course.

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-28, 02:00 AM
Not wanting to hijack this thread, so I will start another one discussing rangers in a bit here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58216) I think ranger is versatile w/o sacrificing much power.

As for the quarterstaff discussion. I may have said this already, but oh well.

RAW- quarterstaff is specifically listed as ineligible for silver.

My view- Silver and Cold Iron bypass DR because things with that DR are 'allergic' to them. Thus I think tips should work in this case. Adamantine tips, however, don't appreciably strengthen the staff, and so I don't think you should gain any benefit from them. Whether or not that should count for purposes of bypassing hardness is a point on which reasonable men can differ, but my opinion is no. I might allow it with some penalty to hit to represent trying to strike with only the reinforced tip, though.

Leon
2007-09-28, 02:33 AM
A class is only as weak as you allow it to be. some have better this or that but any class is vibale to play with and fit your concept

Runolfr
2007-09-28, 08:22 AM
That's actually not a bad idea. Delivering a stunning fist through your quarterstaff than following up with multiple sneak attacks doesn't sound too bad either. It kind of defeats the purpose of the quarter staff's versatility, since you'll get more bang for your buck out just making unarmed strikes, though. Is there any advantage for a monk to use a quarter staff rather than unarmed strikes?

Well, if you go a strength route instead of a dex route, you get the maximum benefit from Power Attack using the staff two-handed.

Hawriel
2007-09-28, 11:38 PM
why would you have a penalty for only striking with the end of a staff? the caps can 3 to 4 inches up/down the shaft. but you can thrust with a staff like a spear but with a spear your only striking with the 'tip' so I guess you should have an attack penalty.

OK BACK TO TOPIC.

here is another advantage to using a quarterstaff. Its not an inharently leathal weapon. If you do get captured and did fight the athorities you will not be charged with murder. fighting to subdue works well with a staff.

Skjaldbakka
2007-09-29, 08:53 PM
why would you have a penalty for only striking with the end of a staff? the caps can 3 to 4 inches up/down the shaft. but you can thrust with a staff like a spear but with a spear your only striking with the 'tip' so I guess you should have an attack penalty.

Because you are severely limiting your options. There are a lot of strikes available with a staff. An attack roll, in my mind, represents finding an opening in your opponent's defenses and then exploiting it. If you only want to make staff thrusts to strike with the tip, then you have to pass up openings for sweeping strikes. Thus, an attack penalty. A spear's reduced striking options are made up for by the fact that it is sharp and pointy, and thus doesn't require strikes with it to have as much strength behind them as with a staff, which is blunt.

Also, mechanically, I don't think staff gives you any advantage in terms of striking for subdual.

Kyace
2007-09-29, 11:26 PM
If you just want a double weapon that you can use weapon finesse on both sides, CrystalKeep suggests the lynxpaw from Races of the Wild. 1d6 18-20/x2 slashing on one head and 1d4 20/x3 Peircing on the other. Also bonus to disarm, can trip.

Human Paragon 3
2007-09-30, 08:05 PM
But isn't that an exotic weapon? The point of the quarterstaff is that it's a simple weapon so the rogue can wield it.