staff vs polearm

Tempest

Artisan
What is the harm done with thrusting with a staff?

Is it much more than that of thrusting with a pole arm? Or even a 1H spear?
 
It's simply that thrusting is not allowed with a blunt weapon.
 
All other two handed weapons are base 3 instead of 2. It's also the only two handed weapon that you can strike with that is allowed to block one handed with. It's also the only blunt weapon that does not have a mass volume requirement for it's striking areas. So, now that we've established just how unlike any other weapons in all the classifications that Staff could fall within, how bout letting us thrust with them already?!

:D sheesh :D
 
It's simply a balance to the build cost. Staff costs 4 build for all classes. Polearm and 2 hd sword are 8, 12, 16. 2 hd blunt is 6, 8, 12. You guys are asking for an awful lot for 4 build.

Staff was designed to allow a low build cost weapon for all classes. To make it as useful as any other two handed weapon would require higher build costs, which would then take away it's original reason for being. And then people would surely complain that there is no weapon choice for four build.

If you want more damage and to be able to thrust and have more reach, spend the 8, 12 or 16 build. Staff is what it is...an inexpensive weapon skill with limitations that reflect its cost.

Scott
 
I get that, Scott, I do. And I think it'll be interesting to play with them for a year or two and see how the new blocking and High Magic rules impact their usage in the game. I do think, though, that if after that period of time they are still virtually never seen in the game, I think they should be re-evaluated to make them more appealing. I would suggest either putting in thrusting and moving them to base 3 or make them free for anyone to use and drop their damage to base 1.
 

paythin

Adept
Staff is also the only weapon where you can attack from both end of the weapon to do the same amount of damage which is also a nice bonus. That ability alone in a fighters/ scouts hands can do some nice damage for just 4 build when they start adding their profs and backstabs.
 

jpariury

Duke
Duke Frost said:
It's simply a balance to the build cost. Staff costs 4 build for all classes. Polearm and 2 hd sword are 8, 12, 16. 2 hd blunt is 6, 8, 12. You guys are asking for an awful lot for 4 build.
You also get significant reach with all the other twohanded melee weapons... staff just gives you two long swords stuck together.

Th truth* is, once upon a time, Scott played this huge npc bad guy, but he totally got pwnd by this guy that watch a lot of David Carradine shows, so ever since, he's done his best to keep staff down.

*your level of truthiness may vary
 

markusdark

Knight
jpariury said:
staff just gives you two long swords stuck together.
without the stabby bit. ;)

Another thing that I always figured was considered is that any pole weapon is often used as a walking stick and the thrusties at the end begin to fade quickly when they're used on the ground so much.
 
Every style/weapon/spell/effect is not going to be utilized equally. Why make staff more effective with a higher build cost when you already have weapons that fulfill those roles? Why not have variety and options? IMO, there needs to be a low cost weapon that is only marginally useful. Staff fills that role. Why make it the fraternal twin of the polearm when we already have a polearm?

Not as many people eat rum raisin ice cream as mint chocolate chip. But they keep making rum raisin for those that do. (I eat rum raisin cause I'm getting old)

Scott
 
IMO staff makes sense the way it works now. And with one hand blocking its the cheapest, "best" (for length) blocking weapon in the game now. Honestly its already gotten a bump in these rules... Not saying it couldn't be better, but I don't think that's necessary. I mean there are lots of things that "could" be better... :D
 

FrankManic

Artisan
Duke Frost said:
It's simply a balance to the build cost. Staff costs 4 build for all classes. Polearm and 2 hd sword are 8, 12, 16. 2 hd blunt is 6, 8, 12. You guys are asking for an awful lot for 4 build.

Staff was designed to allow a low build cost weapon for all classes. To make it as useful as any other two handed weapon would require higher build costs, which would then take away it's original reason for being. And then people would surely complain that there is no weapon choice for four build.

If you want more damage and to be able to thrust and have more reach, spend the 8, 12 or 16 build. Staff is what it is...an inexpensive weapon skill with limitations that reflect its cost.

Scott
I could think that an argument could be made that a staff is a very poor 'caster weapon'. Quarterstaff, in the real world, is an extremely fast, athletic, and effective fighting style that can equal many other weapons in single combat. Casters might be better off sticking to single short sword, or mace. You don't need to know anything fancy to use a mace, you just have to have good aim. Though this ignores the proud and storied tradition of wizards ineffectually beating things with overlong walking sticks on the world's gaming tables since some time in the mid seventies, so we might as well just keep it like it is.

Is there a free weapon? Like a stick or a branch with a nice knot in it or something?
 

Wraith

Newbie
Rocks are free, but thrown weapon still costs build.

Funny that.
 
So many people talk about how staffs are such effective weapons...

However, no one backs it up with any historical context. Throughout history, armies have not used staves as their primary, secondary or any other kind of weapon. Polearms, swords, clubs with obsidian stuck in them, maces, etc. have all been used. Farmers going off to war would grab a sickle or hammer or some other farm tool. They didn't grab a nice young sapling and strip the branches off. People hunted boar and other wild animals with spears, not staves. Even the most primative people living the most natural lifestyles made points for their sticks out of stone or metal or even just by sharpening them to a point and heating them in a fire to make them harder.

People watch and believe too many kung fu movies.

I don't think I was ever pwned as the big bad by a guy with a staff. I have no natural anger at the staff. It's just not all that effective of a weapon throughout history. If you feel otherwise, please don't argue with me, argue with 5,000 years of human history. Give some real life examples of it being used, not that Jet Li used it (along with a rope) to kill 20 bad guys with guns or that Bruce Lee beat up 50 black belts with one. I would be interested to see some examples of men whose lives were on the line choosing to use a staff over another weapon.

Scott
 

Tempest

Artisan
Wraith said:
Rocks are free, but thrown weapon still costs build.

Funny that.
Nice.

Leads me to a suggestion that 'could' appease both sides.

4 build, can thrust with both hands, strike with both ends, block with one, but can't use profs or backstabs. (like the rock).
If you wanted to get the "two handed bonus" of doing 3 points, which is slightly more sexy, go to 6 build.
 

paythin

Adept
Ack I like staff as is, as my fighter I love to go out and play different weapon styles from time to time when I have a chance to make a rep.
 

Angrydurf

Scholar
Duke Frost said:
So many people talk about how staffs are such effective weapons...

However, no one backs it up with any historical context. Throughout history, armies have not used staves as their primary, secondary or any other kind of weapon. Polearms, swords, clubs with obsidian stuck in them, maces, etc. have all been used. Farmers going off to war would grab a sickle or hammer or some other farm tool. They didn't grab a nice young sapling and strip the branches off. People hunted boar and other wild animals with spears, not staves. Even the most primative people living the most natural lifestyles made points for their sticks out of stone or metal or even just by sharpening them to a point and heating them in a fire to make them harder.

People watch and believe too many kung fu movies.

I don't think I was ever pwned as the big bad by a guy with a staff. I have no natural anger at the staff. It's just not all that effective of a weapon throughout history. If you feel otherwise, please don't argue with me, argue with 5,000 years of human history. Give some real life examples of it being used, not that Jet Li used it (along with a rope) to kill 20 bad guys with guns or that Bruce Lee beat up 50 black belts with one. I would be interested to see some examples of men whose lives were on the line choosing to use a staff over another weapon.

Scott

Most of the info on the staff as a superior weapon is apocryphal, such as the persistent legend that Miyamoto Musashi was only beaten once in his career by afarmer with a staff. It is a horrible weapon of war, the space needed to operate the weapon does not allow for close order formations and its easily defeted by most armor as it lacks the mass of a war hammer or mace and the edge of a bladed weapon. For all of these reasons it is a weapon that is not used in most major battles. During times of uprisings it woudl be included in the arsenal of the untrain mob of peasantry in europe along with the other farm implements turned to weapon use.

In the east its a little different story. Extensive martial arts were developed around the use of staff as well as other non-traditional weapons like nunchuku or tonfa. This was due to the heavy restrictions on actual weaponry forceing these techniques to be adopted, though still with little success in actual war. However with developed technique they are very potent weapons in one on one confrontations or even one vs. several. Even in the West this has been somewhat true though the techniques were rarely as formalized. Its effectiveness is in its speed and ability to trip and bind the opponent, its been well established as a weapon in eastern martial arts and its proponants will say it is suppirior to the sword or other weapons and in certain circumstances they are right. It has good reach and unusual angles of attack that can make it very effective against an opponant less familiar with the forms in single combat scenarios. For mass battles not so effective.

All of that said it is not an innately better weapon, but there are techniques that can compensate for its weaknesses. Whats that mean for Alliance? Profs should effect it, as they do. As for the base 3 damage I woudl guess that froma sheer balance perspective the base 3 damage would be undercosted at 4 build and that its more important in Alliance for mages to be able to get a staff than that we accurately represent the weapon. For thrusting hinestly I don't think it woudl be usefull to thrust with a staff given the need to keep 2 hands in the middle region its really awkward to thrust with with the otherend tangleing in your arms/torso and only getting approximately the same length and as a longswod but without being able to lunge and get full arm extension.

I don't think thrusting should be limited on the staff but honestly the inabilty to trip (which has to stay of course) or spin the staff and freely move your hands along the surface to get reach as needed is far more of an issue than thrusting on why its such an ineffective weapon on the attack. And it is one of the best weapons defensively especially with the one handed blocking rule in place. Add thrusting or not it won't make a big differance. If I could wield one I would be curious to see how effective a defensive combo it could be paired with shield but there would be no way to attack at that point so a 1h spear would be better
 
So we basically agree :)

In the end, the game needs a cheap build cost weapon for the less fighting inclined classes. Staff is four build. You get what you pay for.
 

Dangles

Newbie
What class can use the staff?

Don't worry I'm downloading the rulebook tonight so I won't have to keep bugging you guys with my nub questions.
 

paythin

Adept
All classes can use staff
 
Top