Quarterstaff Master - Am I missing something?


Rules Questions


3 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Am I missing something on quarterstaff master? It seems like a wasted feat. According to the Core Rules

PFRPG CRB wrote:
Double weapons: ... quarterstaves...A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can't use it as a double weapon-only one end of the weapons can be used in a given round.

In UM the quarterstaff master feat says the same thing.

So why would I wait until I meet the prereqs to take a feat which allows me to do what I already can do? The only benefit to the feat is that you can take weapon specialization without having fighter levels. No other feat is based on this feat.

Someone please let me know what I am missing here.


Quarterstaff master has me thinking of the Daffy Duck skit every time. I dont know why.

The Exchange

Krongar wrote:

Am I missing something on quarterstaff master? It seems like a wasted feat. According to the Core Rules

PFRPG CRB wrote:
Double weapons: ... quarterstaves...A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can't use it as a double weapon-only one end of the weapons can be used in a given round.

In UM the quarterstaff master feat says the same thing.

So why would I wait until I meet the prereqs to take a feat which allows me to do what I already can do? The only benefit to the feat is that you can take weapon specialization without having fighter levels. No other feat is based on this feat.

Someone please let me know what I am missing here.

I thought the same thing. I assume that without the feat you can use one end of the staff but you have to use it as a two-handed weapon. So quarterstaff master allows you to use the staff as a one handed weapon.


Quarterstaff is two-handed weapon. You can't normaly use two-handed weapons in one hand at all. This feat llows you to treat quarterstaff as one-handed weapon. Thus, classes that relly on one-handed weapons and having the other hand free can use quarterstaff with certain abilities, like Spell Combat feature of the Magus class.

Shadow Lodge

Drejk wrote:
Quarterstaff is two-handed weapon. You can't normlly use two-handed weapons in one hand at all. With this feat classes that relly on one-handed weapons and having the other hand free can't use them with their abilities - like Spell Combat feature of the Magus class.

Quarterstaves are special type of two-handed weapon known as double weapons. In this case the core rules specifically state that double weapons can be wielded one-handed which was what Krongar was pointing out by the rules quote. The full quote from the SRD is as follows:

SRD wrote:

Double Weapons: Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaves, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.

The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can't use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.

Emphasis mine. If we break that up into component parts:

A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand..."
Apparently double weapons can be used one-handed.

"...can't use it as a double weapon..."
Okay, while holding a double-weapon in one hand, I can't use special double weapon stuff.

"...-only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round."
We've already established you can use a double weapon in one hand, and now it's pretty clear that you can attack one-handed with a double weapon to deal weapon damage with the end you strike with.

Shadow Lodge

I always assumed it was if you were using a DW one size smaller, which would make it a one-handed weapon for you, or if you monkey-gripped it. <shrug> I'd never allow you to use a 2-handed weapon (including DW) one handed in my game with out it being smaller or having monkey-grip.


SRD wrote:
The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can't use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.

Except it does not say that you can wield two-handed double weapon in one hand whenever you want overriding the two-handed weapon rule that you need to use it in two hands. While all double weapons are also two-handed weapons those are separte traits. The section you emphasised refers to extraordinary circumstances allowing character to wield specific weapon in one hand, like class or race features or feats which where common in 3.0/3.5 but hadn't make the pass to PF - and that section is copy-pasted from previous editions of srd.

Scarab Sages

MisterSlanky wrote:

A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand..."
Apparently double weapons can be used one-handed.

You're assuming something that isn't stated. Nowhere does it say you can use a double-weapon one handed if you can't normally use the weapon one handed.

It says if you do use it one handed, you can't use it as a double weapon. This is important, because there are circumstances where that might happen.

For example, a Large creature can use a Medium quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon with a -2 penalty. Even if it does so, it can't use it as a double weapon.

So the feat is designed to allow the iconic staff-in-one-hand spellcaster, and gives a few extra bonuses because no one will spend a feat just to use a quarterstaff like a club that weighs too much.

Liberty's Edge

Eric Clingenpeel wrote:
I always assumed it was if you were using a DW one size smaller, which would make it a one-handed weapon for you, or if you monkey-gripped it. <shrug> I'd never allow you to use a 2-handed weapon (including DW) one handed in my game with out it being smaller or having monkey-grip.

This is it. Double weapons are two-handed weapons for creatures of their size, but you can reduce them to one-handed weapons by switching to a version not sized for you. If you do that, however, you can't really treat it as a double weapon anymore. That's all that means.

Quarterstaff Master lets you do the same thing, but without having to use a wrong-sized weapon (and thus avoid the -2 wrong size penalty on attacks).

Dark Archive

MisterSlanky wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Quarterstaff is two-handed weapon. You can't normlly use two-handed weapons in one hand at all. With this feat classes that relly on one-handed weapons and having the other hand free can't use them with their abilities - like Spell Combat feature of the Magus class.

Quarterstaves are special type of two-handed weapon known as double weapons. In this case the core rules specifically state that double weapons can be wielded one-handed which was what Krongar was pointing out by the rules quote. The full quote from the SRD is as follows:

SRD wrote:

Double Weapons: Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaves, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.

The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can't use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.

Emphasis mine. If we break that up into component parts:

A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand..."
Apparently double weapons can be used one-handed.

"...can't use it as a double weapon..."
Okay, while holding a double-weapon in one hand, I can't use special double weapon stuff.

"...-only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round."
We've already established you can use a double weapon in one hand, and now it's pretty clear that you can attack one-handed with a double weapon to deal weapon damage with the end you strike with.

They can be used one-handed if their size category is smaller than the character using it. So, a medium character wielding a gnome sized gnome hooked hammer could not use it as a double weapon.

Shadow Lodge

Aah I was waiting for this whole thread to appear after I initially read the feat description.

I have a question then. Assuming the whole large/small staff thing. As has been stated on a number of threads by the developers/James Jacobs, the quarterstaff as an arcane bond specifically works because you can wield them in one hand at the appropriate size (a medium wizard can hold a medium staff). This was always justified because the quarterstaff was a double weapon. How do you reconcile the difference in those developer statements regarding using a quarterstaff one-handed and the idea that you can't?

I'd dig up the threads, but frankly right now I'm not terribly interested in doing so. It's been discussed a number of times though for anybody interested in doing the search for me.

Dark Archive Contributor

A size appropriate double weapon is a two-handed weapon. The double weapon rules let you use both ends as a one-handed and light "pair" of weapons. This follows the rules for fighting with two weapons, adding 1x and 0.5x your str bonus as normal.

You can also use one end as a two-handed weapon, gaining 1.5x your str bonus. You cannot use the other end in this case.

If you are using a double weapon in one hand (a medium character using a small quarterstaff, for example), you cannot use both ends, you simply use one end as a one-handed weapon. This is to prevent a character from dual wielding small quarterstaffs to effectively double their two-weapon fighting quantity of attacks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

let me see if i understand this right. it allows you to weild a staff as if it was a one handed weapon right so instead of 1d6/1d6 its just 1d6. basically its no longer a double weapon for that use but basically gandalf weilding it with his long sword in the other hand? course thats got to be a -4 penalty right there but hey take it up with gandalf. OMG GANDALF IS A staff MAGUS!!!!!!

Scarab Sages

MisterSlanky wrote:

I have a question then. Assuming the whole large/small staff thing. As has been stated on a number of threads by the developers/James Jacobs, the quarterstaff as an arcane bond specifically works because you can wield them in one hand. This was always justified because the quarterstaff was a double weapon. How do you reconcile the difference in those developer statements regarding using a quarterstaff one-handed and the idea that you can't?

I'd dig up the threads, but frankly right now I'm not terribly interested in doing so. It's been discussed a number of times though for anybody interested in doing the search for me.

I did a search. The first thing I found was James Jacobs specifically disagreeing with your assumption. http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/rules/whatActionWouldItTakeToSimplyHoldATwoHandedWeaponInOneHand&pag e=1&source=search#33

Shadow Lodge

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:
I did a search. The first thing I found was James Jacobs specifically disagreeing with your assumption. http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/rules/whatActionWouldItTakeToSimplyHoldATwoHandedWeaponInOneHand&pag e=1&source=search#33

Linked for you

Fair enough. This discussion has changed course since I last read about it (right around the time of the original PFRPG release). I stand corrected.


Yeah, I always thought that wording of double weapons was wierd,
and didn´t match up to how I imagined it, i.e. you shouldn´t be able to use a quarterstaff 1-handed,
you use a club for that (which doesn´t have a bunch of extra weight messing with your attacks).

I see some peope have some ´plausible´ explanation / interpretation of the RAW
which doesn´t necesitate that all double-weapons are 1-handable @normal size, but for me,
that just doesn´t hold water WHEN I LOOK AT THE WRITING STANDARD USED BY THE REST OF THE RULES.
The rule passage is basically a list / collection of different ways to wield a double weapon,
and wielding it one-handed is lumped in there with the rest of them WITH NO MENTION OF DIFFERENT SIZES.
I´m not even sure if PRPG even still has rules about ´weapons for larger/smaller sized creatures being treated as the next weapon category (2H/1H/Lt.) in the first place.
If this sentence is meant to deal with a completely tangential scenario to that of the rest of the paragraph´s context, namely wielding halfling quarterstaffs in one hand (or equivalents), IT NEEDS TO CALL OUT THAT CONTEXT CHANGE.

*So*, since the original RAW ´allowing´ 1-handed use of double-weapons always rubbed me wrong,
I happily welcome any change that clarifies that you can´t in fact do that (barring Magus ability),
but it DOES need actual Errata to make that the obvious RAW / RAI.
(while they´re at it, they can clarify if main-hand of 2WF ´always´ does 1x STR dmg,
James Jacobs et al seem to ´prefer´ that state of the affairs for Double Weapons,
yet can´t point to actual rules text that coherently tells you to actually do that,
yet a plethora of other 2WF set-ups exist using a combo of 2-Handed Weapons and some other Off-Hand Weapon not held in a hand which themselves re-create the issue on a larger scale (yet JJ et al haven´t spoken to those scenarios, even though Double Weapons don´t have any special wording re: this topic, and don´t have any reason to be worse than those setups either)


MisterSlanky wrote:
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:
I did a search. The first thing I found was James Jacobs specifically disagreeing with your assumption. http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/rules/whatActionWouldItTakeToSimplyHoldATwoHandedWeaponInOneHand&pag e=1&source=search#33

Linked for you

Fair enough. This discussion has changed course since I last read about it (right around the time of the original PFRPG release). I stand corrected.

Near the end of that post JJ agrees that you can use a double weapon one handed.


am i serioulsy the only one thats amazed that i just converted gandalf over to pf by accident? like serioulsy wheres the nerd in you guys? gandalf is a dual wielding staff magus with a item familiar (staff).

Liberty's Edge

Quandary wrote:
I´m not even sure if PRPG even still has rules about ´weapons for larger/smaller sized creatures being treated as the next weapon category (2H/1H/Lt.) in the first place.

From the "Equipment" section of the PRD:

Pathfinder PRD wrote:
The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon (whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed, or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered by one step for each size category of difference between the wielder's size and the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. For example, a Small creature would wield a Medium one-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon. If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all.

And, for the record, that section is only about two paragraphs away from the line about double weapons being used one-handed.

Silver Crusade

vidmaster wrote:
am i serioulsy the only one thats amazed that i just converted gandalf over to pf by accident? like serioulsy wheres the nerd in you guys? gandalf is a dual wielding staff magus with a item familiar (staff).

Frankly he could be a fighter with all the magic he actually uses...

Grand Lodge

vidmaster wrote:
am i serioulsy the only one thats amazed that i just converted gandalf over to pf by accident? like serioulsy wheres the nerd in you guys? gandalf is a dual wielding staff magus with a item familiar (staff).

It's not exactly an overwhelming acheivement. Personally, I think that Gandalf is represented far better in either MERP or 4th Edition as in Invoker, than he ever was in D20.


FallofCamelot wrote:
vidmaster wrote:
am i serioulsy the only one thats amazed that i just converted gandalf over to pf by accident? like serioulsy wheres the nerd in you guys? gandalf is a dual wielding staff magus with a item familiar (staff).
Frankly he could be a fighter with all the magic he actually uses...

Well their were the pinecone bombs in the Hobbit.


I am glad to see that everyone is just as confused by this one as me. At this point it sounds like we have reached the following agreement

  • -You can use a quarterstaff as a one handed weapon without the feat, just cannot two weapon fight.
  • -You CANNOT use a quarterstaff as a one handed weapon normally, only as a 2 handed weapon.

Can we get some JJ help here to give us a better feeling on what this is all about?

Paizo Employee Director of Games

5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. 6 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey there folks,

You cannot normally use a double weapon in one hand unless it is sized smaller than you. This feat allows you to get around that restriction.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Hey there folks,

You cannot normally use a double weapon in one hand unless it is sized smaller than you. This feat allows you to get around that restriction.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Thanks JB!


For the record, Gandalf is:

Abjurer 5/Fighter 1/Eldritch Knight 10 with TWF and these new Staff feats.

At least, that's how I see him. Probably with opposing schools Necromancy and Illusion(?).


Krongar wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Hey there folks,

You cannot normally use a double weapon in one hand unless it is sized smaller than you. This feat allows you to get around that restriction.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Thanks JB!

Thank you.

Grand Lodge

Two bladed swords could be ultra groovy here or Monks whipping a staff around like a maniac... when it states "You cannot normally use a double weapon in one hand unless it is sized smaller than you. This feat allows you to get around that restriction" that you can use the full attacks/benefits that go with using a double weapon, right?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Hey there folks,

You cannot normally use a double weapon in one hand unless it is sized smaller than you. This feat allows you to get around that restriction.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Might want to tell that to James Jacobs before he spreads more misinformation. Or is this a case of you guys getting together and reversing the ruling after the fact?

In either case, thanks for the clarification. I like your ruling much better.


I think the point he was making is that you can hold a quarterstaff in one hand to cast spells for that round. Not that you can attack one handed with a quarterstaff. If a staff prevented casting spells it would suck for almost every wizard out there.

With the new ability listed here you can use things like the Magus spell combat or fight with a staff in one hand and a rod in the other.


Also, the other point that I would make is that it seems like the staff magus archtype is built around getting more AC and wielding a staff...

Sure, you sac your med. and heavy armor, but provided that you have a good staff, your AC will be better than you could get with heavy armor.

EX: Full Plate +5 = +14 AC
VS: Chain Shirt +5 = +9 AC, +4 From Staff Bonus, +3 from Quarterstaff Defense = +17

That's setting aside the fact that you have a much higher max dex with light armor.

Also, it's pretty awesome to be able to take Wand Wielder and attack with your staff.. and recharge your staff with arcane points.

I think it's an interesting archtype, I don't know if it's numerically superior, but I think it's workable...


Beckman wrote:

Also, the other point that I would make is that it seems like the staff magus archtype is built around getting more AC and wielding a staff...

Sure, you sac your med. and heavy armor, but provided that you have a good staff, your AC will be better than you could get with heavy armor.

EX: Full Plate +5 = +14 AC
VS: Chain Shirt +5 = +9 AC, +4 From Staff Bonus, +3 from Quarterstaff Defense = +17

Actually I think that it would end with numbers closer to:

EX: Full Plate +5 (+14 armor to AC), shield spell (+4 shield to AC) = +18
VS: Chain shirt +5 (+9 armor to AC), quarterstaff defense with quarterstaff +5* (total of +8 shield to AC) = +17

*quarterstaff permanent enhancement bonus stacks with temporary enhncement bonus grnted by arcane pool expenditure to maximum of +5, I think it is safe bet that character with chain shirt +5 can get +5 enhancement bonus on weapon with that boost.

Quote:
That's setting aside the fact that you have a much higher max dex with light armor.

True, that +3 extra bonus from Dex to AC gives the AC edge back to staff magus but not so very much.

Shadow Lodge

They can fight with a staff in each hand:)

One to beat people to death with and the other using the Arcana that allows them to use staves and wands as part of spell combat. Hmm now they just need an Arcana that allows them to use Scrolls in spell combat:)

So Staff + Staff of the Magi or Staff + Wand of Shocking Grasp or Staff + Rod of Quicken or Staff + Wand of Frostbite etc....

OMG they could totally TWF using a Staff of the Magi for Spell Combat:)


Drejk wrote:
Beckman wrote:

Also, the other point that I would make is that it seems like the staff magus archtype is built around getting more AC and wielding a staff...

Sure, you sac your med. and heavy armor, but provided that you have a good staff, your AC will be better than you could get with heavy armor.

EX: Full Plate +5 = +14 AC
VS: Chain Shirt +5 = +9 AC, +4 From Staff Bonus, +3 from Quarterstaff Defense = +17

Actually I think that it would end with numbers closer to:

EX: Full Plate +5 (+14 armor to AC), shield spell (+4 shield to AC) = +18
VS: Chain shirt +5 (+9 armor to AC), quarterstaff defense with quarterstaff +5* (total of +8 shield to AC) = +17

*quarterstaff permanent enhancement bonus stacks with temporary enhncement bonus grnted by arcane pool expenditure to maximum of +5, I think it is safe bet that character with chain shirt +5 can get +5 enhancement bonus on weapon with that boost.

Quote:
That's setting aside the fact that you have a much higher max dex with light armor.
True, that +3 extra bonus from Dex to AC gives the AC edge back to staff magus but not so very much.

If we're giving higher level examples, really people should remember to use Celestial Armor. Celestial Armor +5 ends up with +11 AC, and a Dex cap of +8 (which ultimately allows you more AC). So then you add the 8 from the quarterstaff to get +19 to AC (with more room for Dex, too).

In the end you wind up with somewhere around 45 without really doing anything special (10 base, 11 armor, 8 shield, 5 deflection, 5 natural armor, ~5 dex, 1 insight).


Drejk wrote:


Actually I think that it would end with numbers closer to:
EX: Full Plate +5 (+14 armor to AC), shield spell (+4 shield to AC) = +18
VS: Chain shirt +5 (+9 armor to AC), quarterstaff defense with quarterstaff +5* (total of +8 shield to AC) = +17

*quarterstaff permanent enhancement bonus stacks with temporary enhncement bonus grnted by arcane pool expenditure to maximum of +5, I think it is safe bet that character with chain shirt +5 can get +5 enhancement bonus on weapon with that boost.

Quote:
That's setting aside the fact that you have a much higher max dex with light armor.
True, that +3 extra bonus from Dex to AC gives the AC edge back to staff magus but not so very much.

I forgot about the shield spell... :P

Lose, on my part, really...


Actually from what my GM and another player says celestial is a template and had something to that affect on the boards so it could be added to full-plate as well.


I don't understand the ruling saying that double weapons have to be 1 size smaller than you to be wielded in one hand... I DO understand the general rule about weapon size and how it changes how it is wielded, but the double weapon quality specifically says

Weapon Quality, Double, Core Rulebook pg 144-145 wrote:


Double: You can use a double weapon to fight as if fighting with two weapons, but if you do, you incur all the normal attack penalties associated with fighting with two weapons, just as if you were using a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. A double weapon can be wielded as a one-handed weapon, but it cannot be used as a double weapon when wielded in this way—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.

The book says you absolutely may wield any double weapon as a one-handed weapon, but you are restricted to using only one end of the weapon, not both, not that you may purchase any double weapon as a smaller version to be only wielded one handed. Just because a badly written feat comes out in a later book doesn't change a clearly defined rule from core.

EDIT: alternatively, I might suggest that quarterstaff master does not restrict you to using 1 end of the quarterstaff when wielding it 1 handed, it just restricts you from gaining extra attacks as if you were TWF... that + allowing WS for a non-fighter would be worth the feat, it's how i will run it if it ever comes up.

Grand Lodge

MisterSlanky wrote:

Aah I was waiting for this whole thread to appear after I initially read the feat description.

I have a question then. Assuming the whole large/small staff thing. As has been stated on a number of threads by the developers/James Jacobs, the quarterstaff as an arcane bond specifically works because you can wield them in one hand at the appropriate size (a medium wizard can hold a medium staff). This was always justified because the quarterstaff was a double weapon. How do you reconcile the difference in those developer statements regarding using a quarterstaff one-handed and the idea that you can't?

You misunderstand what the Jacobs statement was about. Basically a Wizard who has a staff as his arcane focus satisfies the requirement if he's HOLDING it with one hand, planting the butt in the ground, and using his free hand to cast. That is NOT spell combat because the wizard is only doing ONE action.. a spellcast.

The quarterstaff master feat allows a Staff Magus to wield the staff in one hand as a weapon AND have a free hand for spellcombat.


Caim the Rogue wrote:
Actually from what my GM and another player says celestial is a template and had something to that affect on the boards so it could be added to full-plate as well.

Actually as far as I read specific weapons and armor are very 'specific' for a reason, they are not meant to be purchased as a template or added to.

Grand Lodge

Beckman wrote:

Also, the other point that I would make is that it seems like the staff magus archtype is built around getting more AC and wielding a staff...

Sure, you sac your med. and heavy armor, but provided that you have a good staff, your AC will be better than you could get with heavy armor.

EX: Full Plate +5 = +14 AC
VS: Chain Shirt +5 = +9 AC, +4 From Staff Bonus, +3 from Quarterstaff Defense = +17

That's setting aside the fact that you have a much higher max dex with light armor.

Also, it's pretty awesome to be able to take Wand Wielder and attack with your staff.. and recharge your staff with arcane points.

I think it's an interesting archtype, I don't know if it's numerically superior, but I think it's workable...

Archetypes aren't supposed to be numerically superior if they're balanced correctly. The Staff magus gives you protection and mobility. (Remember that Magi don't get the armor training features of fighters!)

Grand Lodge

Ravingdork wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Hey there folks,

You cannot normally use a double weapon in one hand unless it is sized smaller than you. This feat allows you to get around that restriction.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Might want to tell that to James Jacobs before he spreads more misinformation. Or is this a case of you guys getting together and reversing the ruling after the fact?

In either case, thanks for the clarification. I like your ruling much better.

And maybe you should reread what you're talking about before you impugn your betters. The Jacobs thread WAS NOT ABOUT SPELL COMBAT it was about how a staff operates as an arcane bond for a wizard. The point he made is that the requirements for arcane bond are satisfied by GRIPPING the staff in one hand. A wizard in this case IS NOT USING the staff to attack, only to link with the bond while he uses his free hand to cast.

What Jason is posting about here DOES NOT contradict the Jacobs thread as that is an entirely different situation and question.

Your posts were occasionally vaguely amusing attempts to bend the rules until they scream but you're dancing seriously on the line here.


Wield(NOT CARRIED)Double Weapon in 1 Hand(So you get to use it as your Arcane Bonded Item) & Confirmation.
Nothing in the PRD or James Jacobs statement about the Double Weapon being of a different Size than the wielder, but Jason Bulmahn (Ealier in this thread) "You cannot normally use a double weapon in one hand unless it is sized smaller than you. This feat allows you to get around that restriction."
So it looks like when it hits the FAQ that the double weapons will have to be smaller to be wielded in one hand (without another feat)

Dark Archive

You may wish to reread the appropriate text from the prd again as JJ's clarification has been put in place

"Wizards who select a bonded object begin play with one at no cost. Objects that are the subject of an arcane bond must fall into one of the following categories: amulet, ring, staff, wand, or weapon. These objects are always masterwork quality. Weapons acquired at 1st level are not made of any special material. If the object is an amulet or ring, it must be worn to have effect, while staves, wands, and weapons must be held in one hand. If a wizard attempts to cast a spell without his bonded object worn or in hand, he must make aconcentration check or lose the spell. The DC for this check is equal to 20 + the spell's level. If the object is a ring or amulet, it occupies the ring or neck slot accordingly."

Note it no longer says wield merely that you must hold your bond in 1 hand


Caderyn wrote:

You may wish to reread the appropriate text from the prd again as JJ's clarification has been put in place

"Wizards who select a bonded object begin play with one at no cost. Objects that are the subject of an arcane bond must fall into one of the following categories: amulet, ring, staff, wand, or weapon. These objects are always masterwork quality. Weapons acquired at 1st level are not made of any special material. If the object is an amulet or ring, it must be worn to have effect, while staves, wands, and weapons must be held in one hand. If a wizard attempts to cast a spell without his bonded object worn or in hand, he must make aconcentration check or lose the spell. The DC for this check is equal to 20 + the spell's level. If the object is a ring or amulet, it occupies the ring or neck slot accordingly."

Note it no longer says wield merely that you must hold your bond in 1 hand

Did you wake up this thread to continiue the argument? :)

Grand Lodge

Caderyn wrote:

You may wish to reread the appropriate text from the prd again as JJ's clarification has been put in place

"Wizards who select a bonded object begin play with one at no cost. Objects that are the subject of an arcane bond must fall into one of the following categories: amulet, ring, staff, wand, or weapon. These objects are always masterwork quality. Weapons acquired at 1st level are not made of any special material. If the object is an amulet or ring, it must be worn to have effect, while staves, wands, and weapons must be held in one hand. If a wizard attempts to cast a spell without his bonded object worn or in hand, he must make aconcentration check or lose the spell. The DC for this check is equal to 20 + the spell's level. If the object is a ring or amulet, it occupies the ring or neck slot accordingly."

Note it no longer says wield merely that you must hold your bond in 1 hand

Dude, you do realize that this was over THREE YEARS ago?

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Quarterstaff Master - Am I missing something? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.