Two-weapon Warriors and Shields

I have a player who wants to play a Dwarf fighter that uses a waraxe and a shield. Could you use the Two-weapon Warrior archetype with a shield? I don't really like the abilities of the Shielded Fighter and think the Two-weapon Warrior would fight better since the player wants to be more offense oriented. It doesn't say otherwise in the rules that I can find, but just wanted to double check.

Shields are de facto weapons that increase your AC. If your purpose is be mostly specialized in offense, I don't see why you shouldn't go with waraxe + shield with the TWF archetype.

The shield fighter archetype is good because is defensive and does not force you to boos Dexterity, but for your player's Dwarf is better the TWF archetype.

I could be wrong but I don't see in the rules a single reason to not allow it.

there are even rules to support it

light shields are treated as light weapons

heavy shields are treated as 1 handed weapons

so with a light shield and 1 handed weapon with two weapon fighting feat your penalty is only -2 to attacks

shield master feat reduces that -2 penalty to 0

greater two weapon fighting gives you 3 shield attacks at BAB/BAB-5/BAB-10

@Kaiyanwang: The problem with the Shield Fighter is that it lets you swap out attacks between shield and weapon (making shield slam amazing) but it doesn't actually give you more attacks. You'd still need a higher dex to get the TWF feat chain.

@Phasics: I know about the feats to support it, I was more curious about the archetype working with it. It definitely looks great with the TW Warrior though.

@Kaiyanwang: The problem with the Shield Fighter is that it lets you swap out attacks between shield and weapon (making shield slam amazing) but it doesn't actually give you more attacks. You'd still need a higher dex to get the TWF feat chain.

@Phasics: I know about the feats to support it, I was more curious about the archetype working with it. It definitely looks great with the TW Warrior though.

I was acutally looking at it from the point of view of a TWF Ranger with high STR since it dosent need the DEX to qualify for the TWF feat chain

@Kaiyanwang: The problem with the Shield Fighter is that it lets you swap out attacks between shield and weapon (making shield slam amazing) but it doesn't actually give you more attacks. You'd still need a higher dex to get the TWF feat chain.

yeah, but if, say, I want to build a fighter with dazzling display and high intimidate and stuff, needing high Charisma, the need of high dex could make me too MAD.

Of course, you wouldn't take it for a lot of attacks. You would bash all the time, occasionally using the off hand if needed of another maneuver (say, a flail to trip and disarm).

I was not suggesting to take the shielded fighter anyway - actually, I think that for what your friend needs, the TW Fihgter is better.

And, as said above, shielda ARE weapons. So, problem solved.

Of course this leads to the classic power gamer comment "Hey since shields are weapons and I can weild two weapons why don't I just wear 2 shields and get double the AC bonus. Mwahahah." Have a nice big stick ready if someone tries that.

Of course this leads to the classic power gamer comment "Hey since shields are weapons and I can weild two weapons why don't I just wear 2 shields and get double the AC bonus. Mwahahah." Have a nice big stick ready if someone tries that.

Shield bonus does not stack.

The Admiral Jose Monkamuck wrote:

Of course this leads to the classic power gamer comment "Hey since shields are weapons and I can weild two weapons why don't I just wear 2 shields and get double the AC bonus. Mwahahah." Have a nice big stick ready if someone tries that.

Shield bonus does not stack.

I am aware, but some people will try ANYTHING.

light shields are treated as light weapons

heavy shields are treated as 1 handed weapons

so with a light shield and 1 handed weapon with two weapon fighting feat your penalty is only -2 to attacks

shield master feat reduces that -2 penalty to 0

Actually with Shield Master removes the -5/-10 from the additional attacks. A hard read of the feat states that that you do not receive ANY penalties on attack rolls, this includes curses, short term effects like staggered, and a crowded space.

One thing to watch out for is someone who wants to TWF shields in both hands, it has already been established that they only get the AC from one but by RAW they can hold 2 heavy shields and fight with them with no penalties to attacks from either hand.

It gets to the point where you are using your full BAB for all secondary attacks.

Thanks a bunch for the help guys. And don't worry Admiral, he has no intent on looking like a weird armadillo lol.

Actually with Shield Master removes the -5/-10 from the additional attacks. A hard read of the feat states that that you do not receive ANY penalties on attack rolls, this includes curses, short term effects like staggered, and a crowded space.

Interesting. I never read it like that.

... it has already been established that they only get the AC from one but by RAW they can hold 2 heavy shields ...

Can you link where they said this. I have an old dispute with a DM I need to solve now ;)

TCarbon D. Metric wrote:

... it has already been established that they only get the AC from one but by RAW they can hold 2 heavy shields ...

Can you link where they said this. I have an old dispute with a DM I need to solve now ;)

Well, it is as simple as the fact that Shield Bonuses don't stack. There is nothing in either the CRB or any of the other material that has been put out that prevents you from holding and wielding 2 shields as weapons. Of course this touches on a bit of silly and the games I run have a worldwide "Protection From Silliness" effect in place.

Kaiyanwang wrote:

The Admiral Jose Monkamuck wrote:

Of course this leads to the classic power gamer comment "Hey since shields are weapons and I can weild two weapons why don't I just wear 2 shields and get double the AC bonus. Mwahahah." Have a nice big stick ready if someone tries that.

Shield bonus does not stack.

I am aware, but some people will try ANYTHING.

It's quick and easy to shoot down the stacking shield bonuses.

However, what remains is that a TWF fighter can weild two weapons, and if both are the same weapon, then he only has to take weapon focus, weapon specialization, weapon training, etc., once and apply these things to both weapons at the same time. If he uses two different weapons, then he needs to spend more resources getting these feats and class abilities on each of his different weapons.

So, if he wants a shield for the AC, then he might as well use a shield for his weapon too since there is no "off-hand" in Pathfinder (per official ruling) and this way he can save on feats (etc.). That makes perfect sense and is the most economic solution in the rules to allow a TWF fighter to get maximum benefit from the fewest feats and class abilities.

Yep, it's silly. Yep, it annoys the bejeezzes out of me that dual-wielding two heavy shields is the most cost-effective means to achieving TWF superioirity while maintaining the highest AC possible.
But when the guy who will try "ANYTHING" wants to do this, it's pretty much impossible to point at the rules and say "You can't" or even "You shouldn't".

The Admiral Jose Monkamuck wrote:

Of course this leads to the classic power gamer comment "Hey since shields are weapons and I can weild two weapons why don't I just wear 2 shields and get double the AC bonus. Mwahahah." Have a nice big stick ready if someone tries that.

Shield bonus does not stack.

if you go the shielded fighter route from the APG , there realy is no reason to wield 2 shields , since you don't get the AC bonus and at 5 level you could just use all your attacks to do shield slams.

if you go the shielded fighter route from the APG , there realy is no reason to wield 2 shields , since you don't get the AC bonus and at 5 level you could just use all your attacks to do shield slams.

...and get free bull rushes with every single attack.

if you go the shielded fighter route from the APG , there realy is no reason to wield 2 shields , since you don't get the AC bonus and at 5 level you could just use all your attacks to do shield slams.

But the shielded fighter route is way less damage effective. Especially since Two-Weapon Warrior would allow you to eventually use a Large Steal Shield with only a -1 to your main hand attacks.

But the shielded fighter route is way less damage effective. Especially since Two-Weapon Warrior would allow you to eventually use a Large Steal Shield with only a -1 to your main hand attacks.

Not even that, with Shield Master, you don't take penalties to attacks made with shields from any source including TWF, or circumstantial things like crowding, or even magic/curses. The wording on the feat defeats ALL penalties to attack rolls made with shields.

Xen wrote:

But the shielded fighter route is way less damage effective. Especially since Two-Weapon Warrior would allow you to eventually use a Large Steal Shield with only a -1 to your main hand attacks.

Not even that, with Shield Master, you don't take penalties to attacks made with shields from any source including TWF, or circumstantial things like crowding, or even magic/curses. The wording on the feat defeats ALL penalties to attack rolls made with shields.

I suspect that is not how most people interpret that feat. It seems pretty obvious to me that its purpose is only to remove the two-weapon penalties, which is enhanced by the fact that in its blurb in the feat table it says "No two-weapon penalties when attacking with a shield."

I suspect that is not how most people interpret that feat. It seems pretty obvious to me that its purpose is only to remove the two-weapon penalties, which is enhanced by the fact that in its blurb in the feat table it says "No two-weapon penalties when attacking with a shield."

While I agree that it is nowhere near the spirit of the rule, the way the RAW is laid out a prone, fatigued, staggered character can full attack with shields at no penalty. There a multiple instances where RAW is messed up JUST a little, and rarely is it in the players best interest, I like to think of this as taking one back for the team. Our PFS buddies gotta take the victories where they can get em.

Mynameisjake wrote:

Core wrote:

Shield Master (Combat)

Your mastery of the shield allows you to fight with it
without hindrance.
Prerequisites: Improved Shield Bash, Shield
Proficiency, Shield Slam, Two-Weapon Fighting, base
attack bonus +11.
Benefit: You do not suffer any penalties on attack rolls made
with a shield while you are wielding another weapon. Add your
shield’s enhancement bonus to attacks and damage rolls made
with the shield as if it was a weapon enhancement bonus.

By your bizarrely literal interpretation, you lose all benefits of Shield Master if you are not wielding another weapon. Does that really make sense to you?

Wielding 2 shields as weapons IS Two Weapon Fighting. I have ALWAYS been talking about TWF. If that was unclear then I apologize. When you have another shield in your other hand you ARE wielding another weapon, believe it or not.

Decided I didn't want to get into this discussion. Deleted my post, but apparently you ninja's my delete.

Ok, that is fair.

Now let me take off this stuffy black gi. I'm going to smell like smoke bombs all night!

The downside to wielding 2 shields of course is the pathetic damage output.

Compare a dwarven waraxe to a heavy shield: 1d10>1d4; Critical threat: *3>*2.

Yes you're spending less feats, but the damage is comparable to a dagger.

The downside to wielding 2 shields of course is the pathetic damage output.

Compare a dwarven waraxe to a heavy shield: 1d10>1d4; Critical threat: *3>*2.

Well, focused as you would be you would obviously be using shield spikes bumping it up to 1d6, and once you can afford it you would get bashing which ups its size category twice more, bringing it to 2d6 + Str + Misc other stuff.

Not too shabby if you ask me.

Crit range still sucks though.

Ok, so you're talking 1d6/1d4.

You can enchant any weapon though, so while you enchant your shield with Bashing, i enchant my waraxe with Thundering (or whatever)

so then the shield does 2d6 and the axe does 1d10 + 1d6.

and the offhand light shield does 1d8 as opposed to an enchanted short sword that does 2d6.

RE: shields cheaper to enchant.

Sorry, but this isn't right. If you enchant a shield (or its spikes) to gain an enhancement bonus to attack and damage, you pay the same as any weapon.

And the whole thing about free bull rush attempts...colour me unimpressed. Maybe if you've got your allies surrounding it and you've invested in Gtr Bull Rush, but otherwise weak sauce.

Shield Master's a decent feat but that's at bab +11.

What feats enable you to apply your shield's AC bns to your attack and damage rolls?

RE: shields cheaper to enchant.

Sorry, but this isn't right. If you enchant a shield (or its spikes) to gain an enhancement bonus to attack and damage, you pay the same as any weapon.

You wouldn't be enchanting the spikes, you would be enchanting the shield itself since Shield master does the following Add your shield’s shield bonus to attacks and damage rolls made with the shield as if it was an enhancement bonus. This is how you would be doing it. In addition I could enchant my spikes for +1 and any number of Flaming, Frost, Corrosive and add that to my attacks as well, although it gets expensive enchanting to different things.

To the point about the offhand light shield, you wouldn't be using an offhand light, you'd be using another heavy bashing, likely enchanted in a similar way so you would be using 2 weapons at 2d6 + Whatever else.

In fact I could get two +3 Bashing Heavy Steel Shileds for the price of one of you +3 Flaming Dwarven Waraxe!

Which would function at +5 to hit and damage each, with free bull rushes on each attack with no TWF penalties. I have since backed down from the whole "no penalties ever" thing because I don't know a DM alive who would let it fly even if RAW is RAW.

Ok, at level 11 with the correct feats the attack chain should look like this assuming +3 Str with the above mentioned shields.

+19/+14/+9/+19/+19/+19 (2d6)+ 8

With the guide package for ranger you can get another +6 to hit and damage on a target of your choice up to 3 times a day, and reroll a missed attack (or make an enemy reroll) once a day.

Aaah, i see. But that's at 11th lvl at least. But you're right, that's fine by RAW.

I still contend though that you need to wield a light shield in your off-hand or suffer massive TWF penalties.

On another note, i'd rule that Weapon Focus/Spec. etc. apply to one type of shield (heavy or light).

Bullrush...meh. But why back down from the whole 'no penalties ever'? Totally legit to me. It is an 11th lvl feat with heavy pre-req's after all.

Aaah, i see. But that's at 11th lvl at least. But you're right, that's fine by RAW.

I still contend though that you need to wield a light shield in your off-hand or suffer massive TWF penalties.

On another note, i'd rule that Weapon Focus/Spec. etc. apply to one type of shield (heavy or light).

Bullrush...meh. But why back down from the whole 'no penalties ever'? Totally legit to me. It is an 11th lvl feat with heavy pre-req's after all.

I agree, but boardwide immunity to ANY penalty to hit is just... brutal.

I think I have a new toy for the next high level game I jump into.

When it says add the shield bonus as an enhancement bonus to damage, where does it say that enhancement stack with the shield's enhancement if it is already magic? Is a Heavy Shield +3 intended to be +5 shield bonus and not +2 shield +3 shield enhancement?

When it says add the shield bonus as an enhancement bonus to damage, where does it say that enhancement stack with the shield's enhancement if it is already magic? Is a Heavy Shield +3 intended to be +5 shield bonus and not +2 shield +3 shield enhancement?

Core p.461: In general, magic armor protects the wearer to a greater

Jason Bulmahn (Lead Designer), Tue, Aug 25, 2009, 01:26 PM FLAG | LIST | FAQ | REPLY

Hey there folks,

I am going to try and clarify this in a future errata. The intent here was to add the shields base bonus as an enhancement bonus (that is, +1 for light shields, +2 for heavy).

Sorry about the mix up.

Jason speaking on Shield Mastery

Tanis wrote:

RE: shields cheaper to enchant.

Sorry, but this isn't right. If you enchant a shield (or its spikes) to gain an enhancement bonus to attack and damage, you pay the same as any weapon.

You wouldn't be enchanting the spikes, you would be enchanting the shield itself since Shield master does the following Add your shield’s shield bonus to attacks and damage rolls made with the shield as if it was an enhancement bonus. This is how you would be doing it. In addition I could enchant my spikes for +1 and any number of Flaming, Frost, Corrosive and add that to my attacks as well, although it gets expensive enchanting to different things.

Actually, there's a few things that seem wrong there.

1) Shield spikes are not weapons. They increase the damage type to piercing and damage die, but they are not waepons themselves. They're even listed under armor and not weapons.
2) Is says a spiked shield (not shield spikes) "can be made into a weapon in it's own right." - To me, this sounds like you can either enchant it like armor, or enchant it like a weapon. Once you pick an enchantment type, it stays that.

To the point about the offhand light shield, you wouldn't be using an offhand light, you'd be using another heavy bashing, likely enchanted in a similar way so you would be using 2 weapons at 2d6 + Whatever else.

In fact I could get two +3 Bashing Heavy Steel Shileds for the price of one of you +3 Flaming Dwarven Waraxe!

Which would function at +5 to hit and damage each, with free bull rushes on each attack with no TWF penalties. I have since backed down from the whole "no penalties ever" thing because I don't know a DM alive who would let it fly even if RAW is RAW.

3) A +3 Bashing Heavy Shield would only get +3. In the latest printing (and I assume the errata), Shield Master lets you "add your shield's enhancement bonus to attacks and damage rolls made with the shield as if it was a weapon enhancement bonus".

Ok, at level 11 with the correct feats the attack chain should look like this assuming +3 Str with the above mentioned shields.

+19/+14/+9/+19/+19/+19 (2d6)+ 8

With the guide package for ranger you can get another +6 to hit and damage on a target of your choice up to 3 times a day, and reroll a missed attack (or make an enemy reroll) once a day.

By the new rules, all of those would be at 2 less.

The Admiral Jose Monkamuck wrote:

Kaiyanwang wrote:

The Admiral Jose Monkamuck wrote:

Of course this leads to the classic power gamer comment "Hey since shields are weapons and I can weild two weapons why don't I just wear 2 shields and get double the AC bonus. Mwahahah." Have a nice big stick ready if someone tries that.

Shield bonus does not stack.

I am aware, but some people will try ANYTHING.

It's quick and easy to shoot down the stacking shield bonuses.

However, what remains is that a TWF fighter can weild two weapons, and if both are the same weapon, then he only has to take weapon focus, weapon specialization, weapon training, etc., once and apply these things to both weapons at the same time. If he uses two different weapons, then he needs to spend more resources getting these feats and class abilities on each of his different weapons.

So, if he wants a shield for the AC, then he might as well use a shield for his weapon too since there is no "off-hand" in Pathfinder (per official ruling) and this way he can save on feats (etc.). That makes perfect sense and is the most economic solution in the rules to allow a TWF fighter to get maximum benefit from the fewest feats and class abilities.

Yep, it's silly. Yep, it annoys the bejeezzes out of me that dual-wielding two heavy shields is the most cost-effective means to achieving TWF superioirity while maintaining the highest AC possible.
But when the guy who will try "ANYTHING" wants to do this, it's pretty much impossible to point at the rules and say "You can't" or even "You shouldn't".

Home Games: simply don't allow it. PFS: You can't force him to change a legal character, but you can not allow him at your table if he plays that character.

Congratulations on reviving a 3 year old thread

*3 years, 5 months, 3 weeks, and 5 days to be exact