Clarification - GlassStaff staff from Lost Mines

[Helliquin]

Howdy all

Glassstaff Staff of Defense from Lost Mines:

While holding the staff, you have a +1 bonus to your Armor Class.

The staff has 10 charges, which are used to fuel the spells within it. With the staff in hand, you can use your action to cast one of the following spells from the staff if the spell is on your class’s spell list: mage armor (1 charge) or shield (2 charges). No components are required.
The staff regains 1d6 + 4 expended charges each day at dawn. If you expend the staff’s last charge, roll a d20. On a 1, the staff shatters and is destroyed.

My Ranger/Monk picked it up, happy to give it off to someone else, however just after clarification...

If you take Magic Initiate feat... does this enable you to use the spell portion of the staff?

[Segev]

Howdy all

Glassstaff Staff of Defense from Lost Mines:

While holding the staff, you have a +1 bonus to your Armor Class.

The staff has 10 charges, which are used to fuel the spells within it. With the staff in hand, you can use your action to cast one of the following spells from the staff if the spell is on your class’s spell list: mage armor (1 charge) or shield (2 charges). No components are required.
The staff regains 1d6 + 4 expended charges each day at dawn. If you expend the staff’s last charge, roll a d20. On a 1, the staff shatters and is destroyed.

My Ranger/Monk picked it up, happy to give it off to someone else, however just after clarification...

If you take Magic Initiate feat... does this enable you to use the spell portion of the staff?

The important part of determining whether a given character can use it is to look at who can attune it. Staves like this often say "Must be attuned by a [list of classes here]," or something similar. If it just says "requires attunement," then anybody can attune it. IF it doesn't even say that, whoever's holding it can do what it says.

In short: they can use it if they meet all attunement requirements. Magic Initiate doesn't say you can attune things as a member of the class you have it for, so it wouldn't help.

[Helliquin]

Staff does require attunement but does not list any specific requirements for being able to do so.

Just seems odd to list that it requires attunement, but you can only use the spell portion if its in your class list.

Perhaps a bit missed out there and should have also included the "be used by cloth wearing pansies only".

Still - my ranger/monk will be happy for the +1 AC.

[Segev]

Staff does require attunement but does not list any specific requirements for being able to do so.

Just seems odd to list that it requires attunement, but you can only use the spell portion if its in your class list.

Perhaps a bit missed out there and should have also included the "be used by cloth wearing pansies only".

Still - my ranger/monk will be happy for the +1 AC.

Oh. Well, if it just says "on your class list," it's up to your DM whether Magic Initiate is good enough. I think it is, given that if you take Magic Initiate, and levels in the class you have it for, you can cast the MAgic Initiate-granted spell as a spell known using spell slots granted by that class.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Magic Initiate doesn't change your class' spell list in any way, unfortunately.

However, a lot of DM's don't really like caveats like that on their magic items. Ask if they'll make an exception.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Staff does require attunement but does not list any specific requirements for being able to do so.

Just seems odd to list that it requires attunement, but you can only use the spell portion if its in your class list.

Perhaps a bit missed out there and should have also included the "be used by cloth wearing pansies only".

Still - my ranger/monk will be happy for the +1 AC.

There are a handful of magic items that were made before the DMG was released and with it a "standard" for magic items. Magic Items from Hoard of the Dragon Queen, Rise of Tiamat and Lost Mines of Phandelver were made before the DMG. This includes the Staff of Defense.

This is why it has some very strange rules interactions, such as allowing you to cast Shield as an action.

[Mr Adventurer]

Worth noting that technically a magical staff is not the same as a quarterstaff weapon and may not be able to be used as such - unless there's a rule I can't find, staff (spell focus) is a different kind of item to quarterstaff (weapon).

[Helliquin]

Worth noting that technically a magical staff is not the same as a quarterstaff weapon and may not be able to be used as such - unless there's a rule I can't find, staff (spell focus) is a different kind of item to quarterstaff (weapon).

Fair point. I had overlooked that.

Description of object is: This slender, hollow staff is made of glass yet is as strong as oak. It weighs 3 pounds.

Sounds like something I'd hit people with.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Worth noting that technically a magical staff is not the same as a quarterstaff weapon and may not be able to be used as such - unless there's a rule I can't find, staff (spell focus) is a different kind of item to quarterstaff (weapon).

You're correct, it's just pretty common to allow it anyway. Another point to ask the DM.

[Segev]

Whether it's usable as a quarterstaff is up to the player and the DM, honestly. Some staves spell out they can be used that way, but they have additional magic that is pertinent when they are, so the presence of it isn't indicative that it's unusual for staves to have that property, only that the staves needed to discuss the property in more detail and how they modify it.

[KOLE]

Looks like this is an example of an early bug since 5e was fresh. I'd say by RAW this was SUPPOSED to say "Requires attunement by a spellcaster" or maybe even "Requires Attunement by a Sorcerer or Wizard". Personally as a DM I'd handwave it and call it a Quarterstaff because it feels really cool for your character, but by RAW I don't think that was the intention.

Also, most other magical staffs are considered Quarterstaves for the purpose of attacking, but I don't have LMoP so I can't confirm.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Worth noting that technically a magical staff is not the same as a quarterstaff weapon and may not be able to be used as such - unless there's a rule I can't find, staff (spell focus) is a different kind of item to quarterstaff (weapon).

Counterpoint: A Quarterstaff is not a Staff, but a Staff should almost always function as a Quarterstaff.

Circumstantial Evidence: Same weight, improvised weapon rules state that objects that are similar enough to a weapon are within the DM's purview to treat as that weapon.

Explicit Evidence:

Dungeon Master's Guide, Chapter 7: Treasure, Wearing and Wielding Items, Staffs* (Pg 140)
A magic staff is about 5 or 6 feet long. Staffs vary widely in appearance: some are of nearly equal diameter throughout and smooth, others are gnarled and twisted, some are made of wood, and others are composed of polished metal or crystal. Depending on the material, a staff weighs between 2 and 7 pounds.

Unless a staff’s description says otherwise, a staff can be used as a quarterstaff.
*Does it bother anyone else that the entry is "Staffs" instead of "Staves"? Both are technically correct but I've been trained not to like the former.
It's worth noting that this technically only applies directly to "Magic" Staves, as in Magical Items. The Improvised Weapon rules cover non-magical Staves nicely though.

[Mr Adventurer]

Explicit Evidence:

There it is, the rule I missed! :D

[Helliquin]

Explicit Evidence:

It's worth noting that this technically only applies directly to "Magic" Staves, as in Magical Items. The Improvised Weapon rules cover non-magical Staves nicely though.

Excellent. Glass beat stick.

Pending question with DM if I can cast using the Magic initiate feat. +5 AC for a Gloom stalker/Monk as a reaction wouldnt be too bad!

[ProsecutorGodot]

Excellent. Glass beat stick.

Pending question with DM if I can cast using the Magic initiate feat. +5 AC for a Gloom stalker/Monk as a reaction wouldnt be too bad!

That circles back to what I said previously though, using Shield as a reaction with the Staff requires further DM permission, as the Staff only allows you to cast Shield as an action.

[Chronos]

Amusingly, while the rules do explicitly state that, unless stated otherwise, magical staves can be used as a quarterstaff, they don't ever actually state that a magical wand or staff (of the sort with charges to cast spells) can be used as a spellcasting focus. I doubt that there's anyone who would rule otherwise, but...

[da newt]

"the Staff only allows you to cast Shield as an action" - as written this pretty much makes casting shield with this staff useless.

For your action you can choose to ATTACK, DODGE or cast SHIELD ...

The QA team really messed this one up. It's all over the place - what is it's rarity? LMoP is a tier one adventure, right? If you do house rule that the staff allows you to cast SHIELD as a reaction, this becomes a very powerful magic item.

Of note I did play with a yuanti hexblade warlock who had the staff of defense, a +1 shield, breastplate and 14 dex for 20 AC all the time and on demand 25 AC at lvl 5. They were awfully tough to hit.

[Imbalance]

I'd say an at will +5 AC until the beginning of your next turn is still pretty useful in a great many situations.

[Segev]

I'd say an at will +5 AC until the beginning of your next turn is still pretty useful in a great many situations.

Would you say the same about an at-will Resistance to nonmagical bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage?

[ProsecutorGodot]

I'd say an at will +5 AC until the beginning of your next turn is still pretty useful in a great many situations.

Not technically at will, the item has 10 charges and uses 2 to cast shield.

It also has a chance to break if you expend all charges and isn't guaranteed to fully charge unless you only spend 5 charges.

Not huge downsides but worth noting.

[Luccan]

Not technically at will, the item has 10 charges and uses 2 to cast shield.

It also has a chance to break if you expend all charges and isn't guaranteed to fully charge unless you only spend 5 charges.

Not huge downsides but worth noting.

The funny thing is, I think making Shield an action instead of reaction significantly lowers the chance of breaking it. You're gonna cast Mage Armor maybe twice a day, and while Shield as an action can be useful, generally you won't need to take what's essentially a buffed Dodge action more than once or twice an adventure, even as a squishy mage. The fact you can't expend it during the only part of the game that has something close to a real world time limit means you have a very low chance of ever fully depleting the staff.

[Imbalance]

Would you say the same about an at-will Resistance to nonmagical bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage?

I would, yes, but what does that have to do with how useful this staff is?


Not technically at will, the item has 10 charges and uses 2 to cast shield.

It also has a chance to break if you expend all charges and isn't guaranteed to fully charge unless you only spend 5 charges.

Not huge downsides but worth noting.

'At will' in the sense that it is not restrained by reaction, but you are correct.

[Joe the Rat]

Amusingly, while the rules do explicitly state that, unless stated otherwise, magical staves can be used as a quarterstaff, they don't ever actually state that a magical wand or staff (of the sort with charges to cast spells) can be used as a spellcasting focus. I doubt that there's anyone who would rule otherwise, but...

I've actually had that one fly back from a DM - the argument he gave is "it's already got magic, so you can't use it for more"

Which I consider total bunk, but I will respect the interpretation. For the record, I explicitly make it clear to my players that magic RSW and Orbs are valid foci

[Petrocorus]

Staff does require attunement but does not list any specific requirements for being able to do so.

Just seems odd to list that it requires attunement, but you can only use the spell portion if its in your class list.

Perhaps a bit missed out there and should have also included the "be used by cloth wearing pansies only".

Still - my ranger/monk will be happy for the +1 AC.
The rule about casting spell with an item p141 of the DMG doesn't specify that you need to have the spell on your spells list.
Rather the contrary, it consider the possibility of you not having a spell casting ability.
The confusion comes from the fact that in the DMG (and probably later books) all staves that can explicitly cast spells requires specific classes to attune.
But as ProsecutorGodot said LMoP was release before the DMG, maybe even before the PHB. They didn't think about it.
And because the requirements are specific to each staff, by RAW, nothing prevents you to use the staff and cast its spells.


There are a handful of magic items that were made before the DMG was released and with it a "standard" for magic items. Magic Items from Hoard of the Dragon Queen, Rise of Tiamat and Lost Mines of Phandelver were made before the DMG. This includes the Staff of Defense.

This is why it has some very strange rules interactions, such as allowing you to cast Shield as an action.
The rules p141 also states " The spell uses its normal casting time, range, and duration, and the user of the item must concentrate if the spell requires concentration."
Emphasis mine.
Though the specific normally trumps the general, so it is indeed up to the DM.
This does give an argument to ask this to the DM.


Worth noting that technically a magical staff is not the same as a quarterstaff weapon and may not be able to be used as such - unless there's a rule I can't find, staff (spell focus) is a different kind of item to quarterstaff (weapon).
ProsecutorGodot already replied to you. By RAW, you can use any magical staff as a quarterstaff.
I'd note however that the Spider Staff from the same book does specify it can be used as a quarterstaff, so it may mean this was not the intend for the Staff of Defence.

I don't even think there is any relevant difference in size and shape between a staff and a quarterstaff actually.


Amusingly, while the rules do explicitly state that, unless stated otherwise, magical staves can be used as a quarterstaff, they don't ever actually state that a magical wand or staff (of the sort with charges to cast spells) can be used as a spellcasting focus. I doubt that there's anyone who would rule otherwise, but...
I think i would not allow it for classes that cannot use staves as focus like Cleric for instance, but yeah, it seems obvious that Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard and Druid should be fine with this.


Would you say the same about an at-will Resistance to nonmagical bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage?
The Blade Ward spell does not prevent you to take damages and to have to pass a Concentration save, nor from any rider on the damage, like the poisoned condition.
That's why it's not that valuable even as a cantrip.
In addition of the problem of the casting time.

[Segev]

I would, yes, but what does that have to do with how useful this staff is?

Because there's a cantrip called blade ward that is 1 action to cast, and says: "Until the end of your next turn, you have resistance against bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage dealt by weapon attacks."

I have never seen anybody take it, nor seen anybody advise anyone to take it; it's generally considered a very weak spell choice. I believe shield as an action rather than a reaction is similarly not worthwhile.

[Imbalance]

Because there's a cantrip called blade ward that is 1 action to cast, and says: "Until the end of your next turn, you have resistance against bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage dealt by weapon attacks."

I have never seen anybody take it, nor seen anybody advise anyone to take it; it's generally considered a very weak spell choice. I believe shield as an action rather than a reaction is similarly not worthwhile.

I see where you're coming from. If shield was it's only trick, yeah, that would put it pretty close to the bottom of the barrel of usefulness. As an option on top of what the staff also offers, though, it's a neat trick to have in the tool box, especially at about levels 2-4 when players in the starter adventure are most likely to relieve the mage of this item.

[Chronos]

I think that the Spider Staff only explicitly talks about using it as a magic quarterstaff because it has an extra ability that kicks in when you do so: If you attack with it, it does an extra 1d6 poison damage. You could also attack someone with the Glassstaff, but if you did, all you'd get would be the normal 1d6 (or 1d8 if two-handed) of any quarterstaff.

And while all of the spell-staves in the book require attunement by a spellcaster, that's not true of all of the wands: Wands of Magic Detection and of Magic Missiles don't even require attunement at all, and a Wand of Fear (which almost but not quite mimics two spells) requires attunement, but can be attuned by anyone. Plus, of course, "requires attunement by a spellcaster" isn't a very steep requirement, because there are all sorts of abilities that make you count as "a spellcaster": Being a a high or dark elf or a forest gnome, or having the Magic Initiate or Ritual Caster feat, or even most subclasses, including totem or ancestral guardian barbarian, shadow monk, and arcane archer (plus the more obvious casting subclasses). Out of more than 20 characters my group has seen, only three have been non-spellcasters (an assassin, a battlemaster, and a champion). Most such items do not require that your spellcasting includes anything even vaguely related to the spell the item casts.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I think that the Spider Staff only explicitly talks about using it as a magic quarterstaff because it has an extra ability that kicks in when you do so: If you attack with it, it does an extra 1d6 poison damage. You could also attack someone with the Glassstaff, but if you did, all you'd get would be the normal 1d6 (or 1d8 if two-handed) of any quarterstaff.

And while all of the spell-staves in the book require attunement by a spellcaster, that's not true of all of the wands: Wands of Magic Detection and of Magic Missiles don't even require attunement at all, and a Wand of Fear (which almost but not quite mimics two spells) requires attunement, but can be attuned by anyone. Plus, of course, "requires attunement by a spellcaster" isn't a very steep requirement, because there are all sorts of abilities that make you count as "a spellcaster": Being a a high or dark elf or a forest gnome, or having the Magic Initiate or Ritual Caster feat, or even most subclasses, including totem or ancestral guardian barbarian, shadow monk, and arcane archer (plus the more obvious casting subclasses). Out of more than 20 characters my group has seen, only three have been non-spellcasters (an assassin, a battlemaster, and a champion). Most such items do not require that your spellcasting includes anything even vaguely related to the spell the item casts.

All good information to keep in mind, however the Staff of Defense doesn't require attunement by a spellcaster. The reason class spell lists are being discussed is that to cast the spells from the staff they must be on your class spell list.

So while its true that gaining spells from any feature (Totem Barb, Drow/High Elf, Magic Initiate) satisfies becoming a spellcaster, it does not grant you a class spell list. The only classes that can make full unrestricted use of the item before a DM rules otherwise are Sorcerer and Wizard, as they are the only two classes with Mage Armor and Shield on their class spell list. Hexblade Warlocks can use the Shield portion of the staff, since expanded spell lists state explicitly that the spells found within are added to your class spell list. They can't use the Mage Armor portion however, as no patron grants it as a spell list and they have the option of taking the Armor of Shadows invocation that grants them the ability to cast it at will anyway.

You could argue that Bard could also use the staff's spells if they take Shield and Mage Armor as Magical Secrets but the wording on Magical Secrets doesn't say that the spells are added to your spell list, just that they count as Bard Spells. It's also a fairly sub-optimal use of the feature.

[ixrisor]

.
You could argue that Bard could also use the staff's spells if they take Shield and Mage Armor as Magical Secrets but the wording on Magical Secrets doesn't say that the spells are added to your spell list, just that they count as Bard Spells. It's also a fairly sub-optimal use of the feature.

What are bard spells? Spells that are on the bard’s spell list, surely. So if a spell is counted as a bard spell, it’s counted as being on the bard spell list, which is your spell list.
I agree with it being suboptimal though, especially mage armour.