| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I read it alright. It's Still STUPID.
No one ever fought like this in the 10,000 year history of civilization. Only someone who knows they're not fighting for their lives would ever try it.
Yeah because having two handy spans of metal to deflect blows is a terrible idea.
It is somewhat saddening to see esteemed members of the community with such close minded opinions to the point that one would publicly mock the player at their table by pointing and laughing.
Not to mention the fighting style having a historical equivalent.
One of the things I like about the Shield champion (Brawler archetype from ACG) is that you can flurry with a heavy shield, so you get all the benefits of duel wielding shields without having to carry two shields around.
(You can do that with the brawler too, you just need to get shield proficiency from somewhere.)
Oh, I read it alright. It's Still STUPID.
No one ever fought like this in the 10,000 year history of civilization. Only someone who knows they're not fighting for their lives would ever try it.
It's been done in history - It's a martial art technique - It's been seen in movies - It's been seen in cartoons - What more do you need?
Just because you find the idea silly, doesnt mean it's not a valid choice :-)
Personally i think the whole idea about wielding magic only belongs in a fantasy universe... Ohh wait... :-P
******
Game mechanical, it's not really game breaking, compared to e.g. dualwielding Kukri - just a little extra ac, less damage and some different feats. (remember that the 2nd shield doesnt offer any AC bonus)
RP wise, it could be a less agile melee type who does not believe that "the best defense is a strong offense" and who favors blocking attacks rather than evading them.
Look, fellas. You like it? Feel free to have it in your game. I hope you have fun.
It's not happening at my table because I believe it's as dopey as a hat made of angry weasels. If that makes me narrow-minded, I can live with that.
I also have strong opinions on putting your tongue in a light socket and wearing your underwear outside your pants, which are both things you can totally do in real life...but which are very bad ideas.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Look, fellas. You like it? Feel free to have it in your game. I hope you have fun.
It's not happening at my table because I believe it's as dopey as a hat made of angry weasels. If that makes me narrow-minded, I can live with that.
I also have strong opinions on putting your tongue in a light socket and wearing your underwear outside your pants, which are both things you can totally do in real life...but which are very bad ideas.
Falchions are STUUUPID!
All that "sharped" metal. Only silly douches fight with Falchions.
Falchions shouldn't even be weapons.
Like covering your fist in marmalade, and sticking up you colon, whilst wearing a silly hat.
Falchions are like dildos made of solidified stupid, meant to screw turkeys on a rainy Thursday.
The only people who used Falchions in real life, were those trying to commit suicide, but ended up having a seizure, brought on by overwhelming idiocy.
Also, only sluts own cats.
I am eager to be proven wrong! But I really don't think the dual shield fighting style is something that deserves a place in the game as a viable player option.
Why not? What's the problem with a player using a combat style that he finds cool, even others find it ridiculous?
And why are pre-1970 sources the only valid inspirations? I'm sure there is plenty of cool stuff created in the last 44 years.
Personally, I agree that dual shields are kinda silly, but having it in the game doesn't hurt anyone. It doesn't force any GM to allow nor does it force players to play it. And those who like it can have their fun.
OTOH, removing stuff from the game just because it doesn't fit your personal taste (general "you", not you, James Jacobs, specifically) means players who want that concept will never see any support for it.
So why not allow more people to have their fun rather than limit it to those whose tastes are similar to yours (again, general "you", not specifically you, James Jacobs)? Everyone has one or two tastes that sound silly or ridiculous to someone else.
Besides, it's not more ridiculous than an ordinary armor somehow helping characters to completely avoid the damage from a giant boulder thrown by a 50ft tall giant.
Last, but not least... Shield Knight!
I know, I know... Shovel Knight also draws inspirations from RPGs... But it's an awesome game and everyone should buy and play the hell out of it!
Look, fellas. You like it? Feel free to have it in your game. I hope you have fun.
It's not happening at my table because I believe it's as dopey as a hat made of angry weasels. If that makes me narrow-minded, I can live with that.
I also have strong opinions on putting your tongue in a light socket and wearing your underwear outside your pants, which are both things you can totally do in real life...but which are very bad ideas.
I just find it a tad ridiculous. I mean, you're free to do as you please but saying its on the level of putting your tongue in a light socket?
Honestly, if you want a more ridiculous combat style realistically, dual wielding in general is idiotic, but especially with dual knives and such. It requires a vast amount of training and skill and even then wasn't too effective.
Wielding a rapier in any fight outside of a dual between non armored aristocrats was ridiculous. The first time you met someone with a real weapon, an axe, a shield, a sword, anything, you were dead. You couldn't parry any real weight with a blade that thin and most such characters don't have a shield to block with. They're reduced to hoping to dodge everything.
Honestly, the only place dual shield fighting doesn't have representation is in Hollywood, which is why there's so much resistance to it.
We've been raised on images of swashbucklers, dual knife and scimitar wielders, and swords that would never have been used for anything in real life. We look to rpg to represent the characters we think of from books and movies, but irl their fighting styles were a tad on the ludicrous side, and the choreography of such fights are to look flashy and impress, not to be in any way realistic.
I agree with much of what you say, Thomas, which is why I find it hard to believe you don't agree with my conclusion. A rapier is a fairly ineffective weapon on the battlefield, and dual weapons are probably sub-optimal in the real world. But in point of fact, both things were real historical weapons used in real life battle, sometimes by highly-trained men.
Two shields, on the other hand, leaves you nothing to kill with. And no matter how many cool feats an RPG assigns to it, shields aren't particularly deadly in the real world. And no matter how ooc you are at defense, if you have no offense in a battle, you are going to die.
Aside from some sort of ceremonial or exhibition combat, going into battle with no offensive weapons is just suicidal. I'm not talking Hollywood; I'm talking real historical warfare. Where people are trying to slaughter each other. The two-shield thing is ludicrous in that situation.
|
Two shields, on the other hand, leaves you nothing to kill with. And no matter how many cool feats an RPG assigns to it, shields aren't particularly deadly in the real world. And no matter how ooc you are at defense, if you have no offense in a battle, you are going to die.
A spiked heavy shield in D&D and PF does as much damage (1d6) as short swords and shortspears and composite shortbows, the weapons with which Greek and Roman and Mongol armies conquered as much of the known world as they could physically reach.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two shields, on the other hand, leaves you nothing to kill with. And no matter how many cool feats an RPG assigns to it, shields aren't particularly deadly in the real world. And no matter how ooc you are at defense, if you have no offense in a battle, you are going to die.
In real combat a shield bash can end your life. Even if it does not kill, you can be get a concussion or other head injury that sets you up for the killing blow, so if you want to use real life as your basis then a shield was able to kill people. Was it as good as a sword/lance/etc? Most of the time, no. But that is different from "aren't particularly deadly" and "no offense". Many bludgeons weapons to include shields could fracture skulls and possibly break someone's neck depending on the angle of the blow, and that is assuming the victim had a helmet on. Without a helmet well, I don't think I need to explain that.
Look, fellas. You like it? Feel free to have it in your game. I hope you have fun.
It's not happening at my table because I believe it's as dopey as a hat made of angry weasels. If that makes me narrow-minded, I can live with that.
I also have strong opinions on putting your tongue in a light socket and wearing your underwear outside your pants, which are both things you can totally do in real life...but which are very bad ideas.
I assume that as someone who supports realism in your games Tarondor, your dragons can't fly, your giants have been square cube lawed out of existence (along with most monstrous version of real-world fauna) and you have no half-x races.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not happening at my table because I believe it's as dopey as a hat made of angry weasels.
OK, now I want the stats on that hat.
Weasels have a soft spot in my heart because in the original D&D rules from the 70s, one of the random encounter tables had an entry for:
- Giant weasels/hogs
Dunno about y'all, but we didn't roll either/or for weasels or hogs. We encountered giant weaselly-hogs. Hilarious.
We now return you to your regular programming.
I'm a bit confused by this whole topic, namely a dev coming in to say that "two shields together is stupid" with the implication that there is some rule stopping it, which doesn't seem to exist as shields count as light or heavy weapons unless I missed something.
As far as you as a DM not liking it, what are you going to do about it if your player with a shield drops his sword and picks up another one to two weapon fight with? Lightning bolt from the sky? Have his hand meet an invisible barrier an inch away from the other shield on the ground for as long as he wields one? It's arbitrary to "disallow" someone using two specific weapons together.
My view: Dual-wielding shields is crazy awesome and effective, but a bit too silly at first glance to be a "common" build. Save it for the GM who likes "larger-than-life" PCs and it's more likely to be taken seriously.
Hat of Useful Weasels: A powerful kobold magic item. We can't agree on what it does, but it's an honor bestowed upon the fastest member of the tribe.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Historical combat proves the shield is very much a weapon.
A weapon, that you kill with.
Yep, and some Chinese martial artists dual wielded them. I know Jacobs thinks it didn't happen or was silly, but it did happen.
Mechanically, I like it.
I have also made it work in some games that allow funny combinations.
Silly? Naaa, two spiked shields would be scary. Blocking and stabbing, it could create a mean defence and dish out good offence. So would two spiked bucklers irl (they often had a single spike).
In real combat a shield bash can end your life. Even if it does not kill, you can be get a concussion or other head injury that sets you up for the killing blow, so if you want to use real life as your basis then a shield was able to kill people. Was it as good as a sword/lance/etc? Most of the time, no. But that is different from "aren't particularly deadly" and "no offense". Many bludgeons weapons to include shields could fracture skulls and possibly break someone's neck depending on the angle of the blow, and that is assuming the victim had a helmet on. Without a helmet well, I don't think I need to explain that.
Two shields, on the other hand, leaves you nothing to kill with. And no matter how many cool feats an RPG assigns to it, shields aren't particularly deadly in the real world. And no matter how ooc you are at defense, if you have no offense in a battle, you are going to die.
Ever use the shield and shield abilities in skyrim? Really effective. Very good at totally ruining a spellcaster's day. Get the targe bleed shield and have even more fun with the bashing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dual-wielded shields just sounds like a really cool visual for a "protector" PC. I've built multiple concepts for such a character, though all for scripts I never got around to writing. >.>
But the character's motto can totally be, "The best offense...is a good defense. *BASHBASH*"
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The funny thing is how this whole thread is the inverse of the threads complaining about ineffective, say, crossbows.
"They should be more effective, but they aren't! Rules need changing!"
While here, it's the people who say "no" who are annoyed at the rules because for once the rules actually support a crazy style. XD
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dual-wielded shields just sounds like a really cool visual for a "protector" PC.
A golarion bodyguard, for sure.
Or, part of an elite guardsman/riot-control group, that uses two shields while being pared with their partner using dual polearms taken down a size category. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I could see a pretty badass Redeemer paladin bashing in the slums (for nonlethal damage, of course!).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The funny thing is how this whole thread is the inverse of the threads complaining about ineffective, say, crossbows.
"They should be more effective, but they aren't! Rules need changing!"
While here, it's the people who say "no" who are annoyed at the rules because for once the rules actually support a crazy style. XD
Mechanically I can see why some people don't like dual shields simply because Shield Master says "use two shields with two weapon fighting or you are an idiot."
Now it's like saying Shield Master is to Two Weapon Fighting as Slashing Grace/Dervish Dance is to Dexterity to damage: Why can't more options have these nice things?
Maybe something like...
Blended Cuts
Prerequisites: Two Weapon Fighting, Improved Two Weapon Fighting, Double Slice, BAB 11
When you are using Two Weapon Fighting both of your weapons function as if they have the same enhancement bonus as the weapon with the higher enhancement bonus for the purposes of attack rolls, damage, and bypassing damage reduction. Specific magical weapon properties that function based on weapon enhancement, such as Defending or Courageous, do not gain any benefit from using Blended Cuts.
Oh, I agree the RAW is a bit overpowered. That's why I said, "use this sparingly". Overpowered abilities, like underpowered classes, are fine as long as you're gaming with a decent group. Player restraint—or house rules—can make a big difference.
Actually the terrible crit range means your damage is still likely to be lower. Its a trade off. You still have to pay for the weapon enchant now, so the cost isn't any lower than paying for two weapons, except now you're also buying a shield and two weapons if you want the defensive buff too.
Was there a FAQ nerfing Shield Master? I never heard of any official response beyond "well we shouldn't have printed it that way :x."
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A golarion bodyguard, for sure.
Also fits thematically with the notion of 'shieldmaidens' who provide a defensive barricade for Vikings, or front line fighters in phalanx style formations, where the person in front shield-blocks, while the second rank goes on the offensive with a reach weapon.
Also, a tower shield/heavy shield combo could be cool. Completely pointless and rather ineffective, but cool. ;D
Also, a tower shield/heavy shield combo could be cool. Completely pointless and rather ineffective, but cool. ;D
I kinda wish tower shield wasn't so s!!#.
|
|
Oh deary my! 1st edition AD&D had dual-wielding shields!
Yikes, that female dwarf on the cover might have a beard...
So much wrongness on one cover! :)
No, but they did print a specific FAQ as I recall that said you had to purchase offensive and defensive enchantments separately, which is kinda odd given that feat.Actually the terrible crit range means your damage is still likely to be lower. Its a trade off. You still have to pay for the weapon enchant now, so the cost isn't any lower than paying for two weapons, except now you're also buying a shield and two weapons if you want the defensive buff too.Was there a FAQ nerfing Shield Master? I never heard of any official response beyond "well we shouldn't have printed it that way :x."
I couldn't find a specific FAQ like you mentioned, but do you mean that if you wanted to have magic weapon properties you would have to enchant the shield like a weapon as well even with Shield Master? That's a thing for sure, but also doesn't matter that much with Shield Master. Shield Master covers the most important things you need, straight weapon enhancement by letting you use shield enhancement in its place and then you only have to enchant as a +1 weapon with the properties you want on top of it.
So a +5 shield which is also enchanted as a +1 holy, flaming would still only cost the price of a +5 shield and a +4 weapon, but would seemingly combine effect to function as a +5 weapon with +3 worth of properties, so a +8 weapon... for the cost of 57,000 gold instead of 128,000. Shields may have a lower crit range/modifier, but I'd take that cost effectiveness over 18-20 any day.
Actually, given the exact wording, it allows you to add the enhancement modifier to attack and damage rolls as if it were a weapon enhancement. Based off the wording used there it also wouldn't allow you to bypass DR by the sounds of it.I couldn't find a specific FAQ like you mentioned, but do you mean that if you wanted to have magic weapon properties you would have to enchant the shield like a weapon as well even with Shield Master? That's a thing for sure, but also doesn't matter that much with Shield Master. Shield Master covers the most important things you need, straight weapon enhancement by letting you use shield enhancement in its place and then you only have to enchant as a +1 weapon with the properties you want on top of it.
So a +5 shield which is also enchanted as a +1 holy, flaming would still only cost the price of a +5 shield and a +4 weapon, but would seemingly combine effect to function as a +5 weapon with +3 worth of properties, so a +8 weapon... for the cost of 57,000 gold instead of 128,000. Shields may have a lower crit range/modifier, but I'd take that cost effectiveness over 18-20 any day.
I read that as treating just like a weapon enhancement bonus. If that is not what they meant then it should be rewritten.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sorry, nowhere in there does it say to treat it as a weapon enhancement. It literally just says to add to attack and damage as if it were a weapon enhancement.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 attack and damage rolls made with the shield as if it were a weapon enhancement bonus.
Seems like a case of excessive hair-splitting to justify a stealth-nerf.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two shields is flat out stupid, of course. No, the sensible way to use shields is having one shield in the left hand and using your right hand and legs to make unarmed attacks, yo!
No, but they did print a specific FAQ as I recall that said you had to purchase offensive and defensive enchantments separately, which is kinda odd given that feat.Actually the terrible crit range means your damage is still likely to be lower. Its a trade off. You still have to pay for the weapon enchant now, so the cost isn't any lower than paying for two weapons, except now you're also buying a shield and two weapons if you want the defensive buff too.Was there a FAQ nerfing Shield Master? I never heard of any official response beyond "well we shouldn't have printed it that way :x."
Bwahahahahaha! What?
So if I have a +1 shield, it isn't +1 when I bash, I have to buy that +1 separately.
That is the stupidest thing I have heard. So it is a magically reinforced shield, but try to hit anyone with it, and it is just a normal shield. Oh my lady Lamashtu, that is a terrible decision Paizo, if true.
Dual-wielded shields just sounds like a really cool visual for a "protector" PC. I've built multiple concepts for such a character, though all for scripts I never got around to writing. >.>
But the character's motto can totally be, "The best offense...is a good defense. *BASHBASH*"
Just like the half-full or half-empty glass is a matter of perspective, that means the same thing.
In this case, it would be the difference between "Being the Last one to Stand Up" or "Killing Him before he Kills You."The end result is the same, but the tactics (and number of combat rounds) might be different. :-)
Often seen in movies like My Name is Nobody, where the last man standing in a bar fight isn't neccesarily the strongest offense, but the strongest endurance.
Also the shield bash feats opens up for some early-level battlefield control for a bit more groupfriendly fighting style, compared than raw damage increase of more mainstream dual wielding feats :-)
Enlarge Person + combat reflexes + stand still + shield slam = a very effective speed bump on the way to the softies in the back row :-)
No, but they did print a specific FAQ as I recall that said you had to purchase offensive and defensive enchantments separately, which is kinda odd given that feat.Actually the terrible crit range means your damage is still likely to be lower. Its a trade off. You still have to pay for the weapon enchant now, so the cost isn't any lower than paying for two weapons, except now you're also buying a shield and two weapons if you want the defensive buff too.Was there a FAQ nerfing Shield Master? I never heard of any official response beyond "well we shouldn't have printed it that way :x."Bwahahahahaha! What?
So if I have a +1 shield, it isn't +1 when I bash, I have to buy that +1 separately.
That is the stupidest thing I have heard. So it is a magically reinforced shield, but try to hit anyone with it, and it is just a normal shield. Oh my lady Lamashtu, that is a terrible decision Paizo, if true.
A shield that weights the same and has the same size, but is magically reinforced, isn't really any more efficient to use to club people with.
And a shield that's been enchanted to hit chinks in full plate armor more efficiently, isn't really any better at blocking a sword swing with.But with the right feats, then an offensive shield with defensive enhancements could be devastating.
Removing the 2 weapon fighting penalties completely AND adding a very cheap gold price for adding e.g. +3/+3 to BOTH hit and damage to both shields for the mere pittance (at lvl 11+) of 18.000 gold without affecting the weapon enhancement costs.
Also since there is no penalties to attack rolls with a shield while wielding another weapon (another spiked shield) there is no reason NOT to equip 2 large shields for a bigger dmg dice (unless you're worried about arcane spell failure)
But ofc at this level of expertize, a wizard can turn herself into a dragon without using 4 feats :-P
No, but they did print a specific FAQ as I recall that said you had to purchase offensive and defensive enchantments separately, which is kinda odd given that feat.Actually the terrible crit range means your damage is still likely to be lower. Its a trade off. You still have to pay for the weapon enchant now, so the cost isn't any lower than paying for two weapons, except now you're also buying a shield and two weapons if you want the defensive buff too.Was there a FAQ nerfing Shield Master? I never heard of any official response beyond "well we shouldn't have printed it that way :x."Bwahahahahaha! What?
So if I have a +1 shield, it isn't +1 when I bash, I have to buy that +1 separately.
That is the stupidest thing I have heard. So it is a magically reinforced shield, but try to hit anyone with it, and it is just a normal shield. Oh my lady Lamashtu, that is a terrible decision Paizo, if true.
Here's what the PRD has to say:
Shields: Shield enhancement bonuses stack with armor enhancement bonuses. Shield enhancement bonuses do not act as attack or damage bonuses when the shield is used in a shield bash. The bashing special ability, however, does grant a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls (see the special ability description).
A shield could be built that also acted as a magic weapon, but the cost of the enhancement bonus on attack rolls would need to be added into the cost of the shield and its enhancement bonus to AC.
As with armor, special abilities built into the shield add to the market value in the form of additions to the bonus of the shield, although they do not improve AC. A shield cannot have an effective bonus (enhancement plus special ability bonus equivalents) higher than +10. A shield with a special ability must also have at least a +1 enhancement bonus.
It says to treat the shield enhancement bonus as if it were a weapon enhancent bonus which is NOT the same as add the shield enhancement bonus to your attack and damage rolls.
The latter only gives you numbers. The former gives the benefits of actually having a weapon enhancement bonus.
ok. I get what Thomas Long is saying. It does not say treat the shield enhancement bonus as weapon enhancement bonus. It specifically calls out attack and damage rolls, but I still think it is poorly written. It is not secret what DR does to TWF'ing, so if they did not want DR to be bypassed they should have been more specific about it, if that is what they meant.
I think either interpretation could work, but they should errata it to remove "treat as", and instead say you get an equivalent bonus to attack and damage if that is the intent.
Edit: For now I will assume Paizo they intended to allow it to bypass DR because I think it is more reasonable than not allowing it to work that way.
It says to treat the shield enhancement bonus as if it were a weapon enhancent bonus which is NOT the same as add the shield enhancement bonus to your attack and damage rolls.
The latter only gives you numbers. The former gives the benefits of actually having a weapon enhancement bonus.
Now that's just flat out lying. I posted the feat already in this thread and it does say explicitly add it to attack and damage as if it were a weapon enhancement, not treat it as a weapon enhancement.
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 attack and damage rolls made with the shield as if it were a weapon enhancement bonus.
YOU need to calm down. Someone not agreeing with your view does not make them a liar. And it does say add the bonus as if it were a weapon enhancement bonus.
You just put bolded it for me. At no point does it say "only add the bonuses". That is way to interpret it so you could also be lying if you want to use "read differently" as lying.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Warpriest designates her shield as her sacred weapon. Level 1, the 1d3 shield bash damage becomes 1d6. Grab another shield and you've got two 1d6 weapons that can also be used for defense without switching hands/weapons.
Human warpriest of Abadar 12 (Pathfinder RPG Advanced Class Guide 60)
LN Medium humanoid (human)
Init +5; Senses Perception +16
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 29, touch 15, flat-footed 24 (+9 armor, +5 shield, +5 Dex)
hp 64 (12d8)
Fort +11, Ref +12, Will +15
Defensive Abilities fortification 25%
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee light shield bash +14/+9 (4d8+6/19-20) and
. . light shield bash +13/+8 (2d8+2/19-20)
Special Attacks channel positive energy 5/day (DC 20, 4d6)
Warpriest Spells Prepared (CL 12th; concentration +16):
. . 4th—divine power, forceful strike (2, DC 18), freedom of movement
. . 3rd—dispel magic, magic vestment, summon monster iii, symbol of healing{super}UM{/super}, wrathful mantle{super}APG{/super} (DC 17)
. . 2nd—aid, bear's endurance, bull's strength, hold person (2, DC 16), returning weapon{super}UC{/super}
. . 1st—bless (2), magic weapon, obscuring mist, protection from evil (2)
. . 0 (at will)—create water, detect magic, light, mending, read magic
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 20, Dex 21, Con 10, Int 10, Wis 18, Cha 10
Base Atk +9; CMB +14; CMD 29
Feats Dual Enhancement[ACG], Improved Critical (shield, light), Improved Shield Bash, Improved Two-weapon Fighting, Lunge, Power Attack, Shield Focus, Shield Slam, Shield Snag, Two-weapon Defense, Two-weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus (shield, light)
Skills Climb +10 (+14 to catch yourself on wall or slope when falling if you have a shield equipped), Diplomacy +7, Heal +11, Intimidate +7, Knowledge (religion) +7, Perception +16, Sense Motive +11, Spellcraft +7, Stealth +7, Survival +11
Languages Common
SQ agile feet, aura, aura of protection, blessing (protection blessing, travel blessing), blessings, dimensional hop, fervor 4d6, increased defense +2, sacred armor +2, sacred weapon +3
Other Gear celestial armor, +3 bashing fortification (light) ramming shield spikes mithral light steel quickdraw shield, +3 ghost touch shield spikes throwing (metal shields) mithral light steel quickdraw shield, belt of physical might +4 (Str, Dex), cloak of resistance +3, goggles of night, headband of inspired wisdom +2, 367 gp
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Agile Feet (Su) As a swift action, ignore difficult terrain penalties (even magical ones) for 1 rd.
Aura (Ex) The character has a strong aura corresponding to his deity's alignment.
Aura of Protection (10 Energy Resistance) (Su) Allies in 30 ft gain acid, cold, electricity, fire, and sonic resist 10 for 1 min.
Blessings (9/day) (Su) Pool of power used to activate Blessing abilities.
Dimensional Hop (Su) As a move action, teleport 20 ft per point spent with no AoO. Bring others for 1 more point.
Dual Enhancement When using div bond or sac wep, you may enha 2 wep or both ends of a dbl wep.
Fervor 4d6 (10/day) (Su) Standard action, touch channels positive/negative energy to heal or harm. Swift to cast spell on self.
Fortification 25% You have a chance to negate critical hits on attacks.
Improved Shield Bash You still get your shield bonus while using Shield Bash.
Increased Defense +2 (Su) Gain a +2 bonus to saves and AC for 1 min.
Lunge Can increase reach by 5 ft, but take -2 to AC for 1 rd.
Power Attack -3/+6 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage.
Sacred Armor +2 (12 minutes/day) (Su) As a swift action, grant armor enhancement bonus or certain powers. Use 1 fervor as free action to also activate Sacred weapon.
Sacred Weapon +3 (12 rounds/day) (Su) As a swift action, grant weapon enhancement bonus or certain powers.
Shield Focus +1 Shield AC
Shield Slam Shield Bash attack gives a free bull rush on a hit.
Shield Snag Shield Bash: Use atk roll as free disarm attempt.
Two-Weapon Defense +1 to AC while wielding 2 weapons. +2 when doing so defensively.
Warpriest Channel Positive Energy 4d6 (5/day, DC 20) (Su) Positive energy heals the living and harms the undead; negative has the reverse effect.