Damage anomaly with Wizard's Staves?

[RobW]

Originally Posted by hcobb

But we all agree that the rules explicitly allow a talentless wizard to defend against a greatsword with a wand of negligible weight that does no damage of its own on a physical strike, right?

Stand back everyone, I've got this!

p 117 "A figure must have a physical weapon (staff, sword, club, etc.) in hand in order to defend;"

A staff made as a wand of negligible weight can only do occult, not physical, damage.
Therefore, such a staff is not a physical weapon.
Therefore, such a staff can not be used to defend.
QED. GG. TY.

Of course, as you have also pointed out, by this logic you can't defend with a shield either.

[Shostak]

You can use a shield to shield-rush, so it is a weapon.

[larsdangly]

In addition to being an obvious table ruling, the rule book explicitly forbids using a wisp of straw to defend. This is a non issue.