[Feat] The Versatile Quarterstaff

[paddyfool]

Hey people,

This is a feat based on the ones that already exist for other weapons/weapon combinations like the Halberd etc., and which is based on things which I know you can do with a quarterstaff quite easily (sweep someone's legs from under them and pound on them without causing serious injury). I don't think it's unbalanced, since it doesn't really up the power of the weapon, just expand its versatility. The requirements are designed with monks or fighters in mind. What do you think?

Feat: The Versatile Quarterstaff
Requirements: BAB+6, Improved Trip, Weapon focus (quarterstaff)
With this feat, you may use your quarterstaff for a trip attack and have the option of dropping it rather than being tripped yourself if your attempt is unsuccessful. You may also use your quarterstaff to deal non-lethal damage without taking any penalty.

Normal: May not use a quarterstaff to trip opponents. Take a -4 to hit when choosing to inflict non-lethal damage.
Is it balanced, or should I throw in a "+2" to that trip?

Edit: This is pretty much my first attempt at homebrew, so please be gentle ;-)

[Lord Iames Osari]

I'd say it's underpowered. Drop the BAB requirement down a little, get rid of the Weapon Focus requirement... That's be good, I think.

[JellyPooga]

I'd have said keep the BAB and Weapon focus as prereqs myself.

Instead of +2 to trip (after all, you have got +4 already from Imp Trip), make it something like you can apply Weapon Finesse

(I've always seen QS as a finesse weapon myself)

[ExHunterEmerald]

(I've always seen QS as a finesse weapon myself)

Played as Kilik lately?
The things are hard to get moving, yeah, but once you've got inertia those suckers can go.

[paddyfool]

Actually, in RL they really aren't all that hard to get moving. Maybe I should just make it a little easier to get this feat by shifting the BAB requirement to +3, so that it becomes more useful to characters who haven't yet got the cash to invest in merciful weaponry. That way, it should be perfectly accessible to any monk, or high Int other combatant, who wanted to specialise in the quarterstaff. Of course, it isn't all that useful for monks, because their unarmed strikes give them plenty of non-lethal damage. Drat, homebrew is harder than I thought.

Also, wizards and druids often use quarterstaffs, but don't often take Improved Trip. Maybe that would be the best requirement to nix. Any thoughts?

[endoperez]

Are any of you familiar with newsgroups? In rec.games.frp.dnd , they have discussed the Quarterstaff and its different uses quite a lot recently. They even went through a very familiar problem of not being able to find a good name for a "Order of the Stick"/Staff-master PrC. One idea that they threw around was having Martial (and/or Exotic Quarterstaff) in addition to the Simple Quarterstaff. The idea was that more skilled warriors can utilize the same weapon better.

I haven't contacted Jasin Zujovic about quoting him here, but I will, and I'll remove this quote if he opposes it.

Jasin Zujovic
There have been ideas about treating some weapons (quarterstaves and
spears in particular came up) similar to bastard sword. The bastard
sword is 1d10 19-20/x2 two-handed Martial and 1d10 19-20/x2 one-handed
Exotic.

People with Simple weapon proficiency use the quarterstaff as it is now.
But someone with proficient in all martial weapons (or someone who took
Martial Weapon Proficiency (quarterstaf)) might get a +1 shield bonus to
AC when wielding a quarterstaff (just look at Robin Hood defending with
a quarterstaff in all those movies).

So the Martial version is not a different weapon, just a different mode
of use.

Martial Quarterstaff:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.g...da90e8ef4d9d1c


Ability to trip would probably be worth a feat, and the ability could just as well be called an Exotic use of a quarterstaff.

Martial Quarterstaff could be 1d8/1d8 or just 1d8/1d6. Being able to deal non-lethal damage would be weaker in most situations, but it would be closer to the original idea of adding versatility to different weapons. It shouldn't be more powerful as proper martial weapons, because that would limit their usefulness, but giving warrior-types a bit more versatility can't be bad.

[Raum]

Feat: The Versatile Quarterstaff
Requirements: BAB+6, Improved Trip, Weapon focus (quarterstaff)
With this feat, you may use your quarterstaff for a trip attack and have the option of dropping it rather than being tripped yourself if your attempt is unsuccessful. You may also use your quarterstaff to deal non-lethal damage without taking any penalty.

Normal: May not use a quarterstaff to trip opponents. Take a -4 to hit when choosing to inflict non-lethal damage.
Is it balanced, or should I throw in a "+2" to that trip?

I'd recommend reducing the up front requirements, specifically drop the BAB to +3 or so and drop the Improved Trip requirement altogether. Second, I'd add a third situational ability and turn it into a tactical feat. You've got tripping and non-lethal damage, a bonus to fighting defensively might be a good third ability.

[paddyfool]

A tactical feat was the general idea. There already is a feat for a bonus to your Shield stat from double weapons (two weapon defense). However, I don't think this would be too unbalanced:

Feat: The Versatile Quarterstaff
Requirements: Dex 13, Int 13, BAB+3, Combat Expertise, Weapon focus (quarterstaff)
With this feat, you may use your quarterstaff for a trip attack and have the option of dropping it rather than being tripped yourself if your attempt is unsuccessful. You may also use your quarterstaff to deal non-lethal damage without taking any penalty. Finally, you take a +1 Shield bonus while using the Combat Expertise feat to increase your defense (this stacks with the +1 from Two Weapon Defense if you have that feat).

Normal: May not use a quarterstaff to trip opponents. Take a -4 to hit when choosing to inflict non-lethal damage. Take no bonus to defense from quarterstaff unless have Two Weapon Defense

BTW, am I right in thinking Two Weapon Defense contributes +1 but not +2 while using Combat Expertise?

[The_Shaman]

Er, it says nothing about combat expertise... but other WotC sources mention bonuses to defense when performing the total defense maneuver, fighting defensively OR using combat expertise with at least -2 to attack.