Does the shield master feat make the enhancement bonus on a shield stack with its enchantment as a weapon?
For instance:
A +2 shield would act as a +2 weapon
A shield with +2 weapon enchantments IS a +2 weapon
Does a shield enchanted as a +2/+2 Shield function a +4 weapon when used with the shield master feat?
It says "as if it were a weapon enhancement bonus".
So if it already has a weapon enhancement bonus, and then you add another to it, then they don't stack, but use the highest of the two. So said shield remains a +2.
However I suppose if you have a +2 on the armor side of the shield and a +1 flaming on the weapon, then you end up with a +2 flaming.
but if you go towards shield master dont waste money on an enhancement bonus on the weapon part end just do the shield :-) this way you can spend more money on it !! :-)
best way to usually enchant a shield while going shield master is to work up to your +5 shield enhancement asap to get all that double mileage out of the way and rolling, then either stack on any shield special abilities you want. After that when you have extra gold to splurge with put a Plain old +1 and whatever melee enhancements you get giggles from like flaming, holy, bane, all the oldies but goodies in my opinion.
Asta
PSY
P.S. for the record my favorite uber end game setup is a +5 spiked light shield with bashing, arrow deflection, bane, corrosive burst, and speed. This is a very high cost item and only to be reached for when in a game destined to go to high levels =)
Bashing and Spiked don't stack.
Bashing and spiked do stack
Bashing and spiked maybe stack ?
Anyone else ?
Rules please! :D
effective size catagories dont stack
Could you pull up the FAQ or source for that? Not challenging. Just asking. I was under the impression that if you carry a spiked shield and you get enlarged, that spiked shield would do more damage than a regular enlarged shield. Odd if not the case.
There is no FAQ on it, but there is a statement from SKR and one of the other developers saying they don't like it but, because they don’t like the idea of 1 handed weapon doing the same damage as a great sword. Despite the increased cost of mundane weapon for a magical property. I don't think there has ever been an office ruling on it. Everyone also state bonus of the same type don’t stack as their reference. But the thing is it is not a bonus it is a modification of the weapon, one is magical bonus the other is mundane modication or a completely differnet weapon it is two different source. Similar argument was made back in the 3.0 to 3.5 days about keen and improved critical stacking. It pretty fair to assume where an official rule would end up. There is also that crappy wording left in the shields spike them levels can be treated the spikes as a separate magic weapon to cause more confusion. I had several player think they had to enchant the shield spike and the shield both as a weapon to have the effects.
The real problem is the shield become too powerful of a weapon with little feat investment to outdo any other weapon. This is mainly due to what shield master does, the feat itself is broken. No penalty to two weapon fighting RAI, not RAW as others pointed out recently in other threads. Along with have cheap cost enhancement bonus to ac and attack and damage roll. Touch ac if Armor master fighter archetype. And I think one of the perquisites gives you a free bull rush also that does not provoke Aoo on every shield slam attack. The shield rules are quite messy just like the combat rules and are for mounted combat and due for a major clean up. The feat chain more than likely should have been 1 or 2 more feet longer. I am all for stacking of spikes and bashing I mean you have to pay for it. there is a cost and investment.The Captin America type builds are quite fun but the feat investment is so small it does become over power and broken.
I'm not sure I'd call getting Shield Master a little feat investment: Proficiency, Improved Shield Bash, TWF (meaning Ranger or 15 Dex investment), Shield Slam, and Shield Master. But people are certainly free to think whether something is overpowered or not.
I see under the description of Shield Spikes that it increases "the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger than you." I've always taken this to mean that simply put, the damage category has been moved up 1 step. So d4 to d6 for Hvy Shield. Since there isn't an actual change in size, I figured it stacked with things like Enlarge Person where it DOES actually change size.
The Bashing property says it does "damage as if it were a weapon of two size categories larger." The language is similar, but markedly different. Not trying to pick apart the text, but I guess I was always of the camp that said these stack. They're not real size bonuses in any sense. They're "as if" size bonuses...which is to say, nothing really. heh
I guess there's a debate on this too, like many other things.
Elbedor wrote: I'm not sure I'd call getting Shield Master a little feat investment: Proficiency, Improved Shield Bash, TWF (meaning Ranger or 15 Dex investment), Shield Slam, and Shield Master. But people are certainly free to think whether something is overpowered or not. You don't need any of those to bash with a shield - and if they stacked, you would have a 1-handed weapon that does 2d6 damage, plus on any turn you don't attack with it, it increases your AC!
The feats above just make it even *better*, allowing you to keep your AC bonus, dual wield these beasts, get free bull rushes, and make them much cheaper to own, since you can double up on your defensive and offensive enhancements.
That's why the devs don't like it.
Understandable. But then why did the Devs make it that way? And if they didn't intend it, a quick FAQ would certainly clear up the matter.
Plus a 2d6(20/x2) 1-handed weapon isn't exactly game breaking. It has to be a +1 bashing shield at least, which is 4000gps. A +1 flaming sword costs twice this, but gives you about +2 more damage for the trade [1d8(19-20/x2)+1d6]...AND you can attack with it while STILL benefiting from a shield AC in the other hand.
Granted, you could fight with 1 shield while holding another one for defense...but that's just pure cheese. Plus this sort of wanders off from the OP.
but a flaming weapon also requires standard action to activate most creatures are resistance are immune to that damage netting you a lot less for more cost.
For a fighter level 2 level dips in ranger is not a bad thing to get TWF if you don't have the dex, you get extra skill points more class skills a favored enemy increased your reflex saves. I think it a small feat investment especial for fighters. For rangers it is even worse as they can get at level 6. unlike fighter who has to at least wait until level 11 for his bab to get that high. both get shield prof for free fighters get a feat every level, most of the time a fighter do not know what to pick because he has too many feat. Ranger get to outright ignore the prerequisites. It is high for a paladin, cleric or barbarian. but most people are not going to make them as shield focus character. The class that.
It not like it a huge feat tax either all of the perquisites of shield master are useful. There is no negative to any of them. one lets you keep shield AC while bashing, useful well worth a feat, a free bull rush every time you hit that can also knock target prone, useful, two weapon fighting is the only feat tax, but that is useful in of it self as shield are 1 handed and you going to have another weapon when figthing with one reducing the peanlty.
I think devs over looked this, as no one thinks of dual wielding shield as primary weapon off the bat. it would be easy to see until not see this until all the captain America builds came out then the dual wielding shield build came next after seeing how strong the cap builds are. the broken wording of shield master feat means no penalties for using two shields and +5 weapons and armor at half the cost.
Flaming was just an example. Substitute Keen, Frost, or Shocking if you like. And as a +2 item, this is talking about low level gear where "most creatures are" not "resistant or immune". If you want to go higher level, feel free. Many items even out at top levels once you pour that much gold into them. Put everything into your shield if you like, or divide it between your sword and shield. And as far as the Shield Master feat chain, if you don't want it, don't take it. Seems easy enough. But again, this is going away from the OP.
The answer for the OP was already given. In short, no.
And just a note; TWF with two shields is just too corny. I don't know an adventuring group that would seriously consider taking on some clown walking around with 2 shields on his arms. Besides, how does one fasten the second shield on (assuming both heavy ones) since you don't have a free hand to strap it on, as you're wearing one already (thus occupying that hand)? That's like strapping a watch onto your wrist by only using the arm which the watch is going onto.
I suppose you could wear but not wield the first shield as you strap on the second. Hmm...still silly looking, and probably not what the Devs intended.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Use two Klars. Thematically appropriate for Shoanti as well.
Samurai Jack can do it, why not my character?
link
Then there is this guy
Bizbag wrote: Elbedor wrote: I'm not sure I'd call getting Shield Master a little feat investment: Proficiency, Improved Shield Bash, TWF (meaning Ranger or 15 Dex investment), Shield Slam, and Shield Master. But people are certainly free to think whether something is overpowered or not. You don't need any of those to bash with a shield - and if they stacked, you would have a 1-handed weapon that does 2d6 damage, plus on any turn you don't attack with it, it increases your AC!
The feats above just make it even *better*, allowing you to keep your AC bonus, dual wield these beasts, get free bull rushes, and make them much cheaper to own, since you can double up on your defensive and offensive enhancements.
That's why the devs don't like it. Problems!
One handed weapons are inherently less damaging than two-handed weapons. If you're not a swashbuckler it just plain isn't possible to do more damage with a one-handed weapon than using the equivalent weapon in two hands. That shield that does 2d6 damage is, after feats and money have been spent, less damaging than a greatsword is the second you pick it up. A guy with a greatsword doesn't have quite as many attacks as you do but his attacks are more accurate, do more damage, cost less money, and leave a ton of feats open to surpass a dual-shielder in other ways.
Both shields give a shield bonus, which can only be applied once, so dual-shields do not give a stacking bonus to AC. A shield can never give you more than +7 AC by itself, while a suit of plate with the equivalent enhancements is giving +14 AC by itself.
Bull rushes are not particularly useful in melee combat, particularly not for two-weapon fighters, since you want to keep your enemies as close to you as possible so you can use your full attacks. It's a nice option to have in the niche situations Bull Rush does something handy but a lot of the time it's one of the most harmless maneuvers to get for free since you can't do much to seriously trouble your opponent with it without the rules letting you knock them into pits or off walls.
If you are not a ranger or slayer, Shield Master cannot be taken before level 11, meaning it is practically an endgame feat for every class that does not have the fighting style class feature. Few games ever progress past level 12, and really your shield being good on offense and defense after completing one of THE largest feat trees in the game is 100% fair in my book when other classes around that level might be doing things like casting Chain Lighting to one-shot entire encounters, Flesh To Stone as a save-or-die, Planar Binding for massive shenanagans, turning into a large elemental or Huge animal for 11 hours at a time, and so on.
Shield Master is handy, but I wouldn't call it OP at all, and something that requires you to get invested in TWF and then some is so many feats that nothing is ever going to look at it twice unless they're a fighter, who can pay the taxes, or the ranger, who gets tax breaks.
Blackwaltzomega wrote: A shield can never give you more than +7 AC by itself, while a suit of plate with the equivalent enhancements is giving +14 AC by itself. A: +5/+5 Heavy Shield + Defending + Shield Focus + Greater Shield Focus + Shield Wall + Taldan Duelist = +17 AC
B: You can use a shield AND plate armor. They stack.
Note: Tower shields give +2 higher base AC than heavy, but can't be combined with Defending per the FAQ that this bonus only applies when attacking with the weapon (which can't be done with a tower shield).
CBDunkerson wrote: Blackwaltzomega wrote: A shield can never give you more than +7 AC by itself, while a suit of plate with the equivalent enhancements is giving +14 AC by itself. A: +5/+5 Heavy Shield + Defending + Shield Focus + Greater Shield Focus + Shield Wall + Taldan Duelist = +17 AC
B: You can use a shield AND plate armor. They stack.
Note: Tower shields give +2 higher base AC than heavy, but can't be combined with Defending per the FAQ that this bonus only applies when attacking with the weapon (which can't be done with a tower shield). I take some issue with that many feats counting as part of "by itself," but fair enough. But I have some things to say about this, too.
Taldan Duelist cannot be used with light or heavy shields. 16 AC, 14 if you are for any reason not standing right next to the other character in your party with Shield Wall.
I should also mention that if you're including the bashing mentioned in the quote I was responding to this is a +6/+6 shield, which I'm calculating in the ballpark of 108,000 GP, while the +5 Plate Armor costs 26,500 GP. So zero feats and about a quarter of the GP investment to get the same +14 AC when not standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the other Shield Wall guy.
You can indeed wear both a shield and heavy armor! The post I was responding to, however, was about the matter of dual-shielding; you COULD, but you get no added defensive benefit from doing so compared to just getting some armor on.
I also feel like my assessment that Shield Master and builds derived from it are anything BUT light investments of feats and money is still spot-on.
To Blackwaltzomega:
Yeah, it's a big big investment, it may not be the most powerful build, but if that's the theme we want to play, why knock us down?
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Seneh Gibbraneh wrote: To Blackwaltzomega:
Yeah, it's a big big investment, it may not be the most powerful build, but if that's the theme we want to play, why knock us down?
You misunderstand me. My entrance to the thread was addressing the conversation that started from KainPen's comment on Shield Master being broken, or at least too good for too little investment, a sentiment I vociferously disagree with.
I can't think of a single fighting style that requires MORE investment than Sword & Board in both gold and feats. In my view there is zero problem with shield master because even going all-in on it it is never making a build that is just straight-up better than someone that chose something like a greatsword and heavy armor instead.
The concerns about "a one handed weapon doing the same damage as a greatsword" KainPen mentioned are wholly unfounded. It's just plain not possible for a one-handed weapon like the shield to do more damage than a two-handed weapon like the greatsword when both are used by characters of equivalent strength, and that's before taking into account that the greatsword's power attack is a 1:3 gain compared to the one-handed weapon's 1:2.
I'm not knocking down the idea of playing Sword & Board. I'm knocking down the notion it is somehow an easy or cheap option. It's a very expensive, high-investment option, and it deserves feats as good as Shield Master.
Bizbag wrote: Elbedor wrote: I'm not sure I'd call getting Shield Master a little feat investment: Proficiency, Improved Shield Bash, TWF (meaning Ranger or 15 Dex investment), Shield Slam, and Shield Master. But people are certainly free to think whether something is overpowered or not. You don't need any of those to bash with a shield - and if they stacked, you would have a 1-handed weapon that does 2d6 damage, plus on any turn you don't attack with it, it increases your AC!
The feats above just make it even *better*, allowing you to keep your AC bonus, dual wield these beasts, get free bull rushes, and make them much cheaper to own, since you can double up on your defensive and offensive enhancements.
That's why the devs don't like it. Honestly my response to this is "whoopdedoo, so what".
Seriously with a melee build the base damage of the weapon is very rarely of any significant importance.
To paraphrase OotS "And all those abilities means he does 94 + 1d12 pts of damage. I hope he doesn't roll a 12".
Weapon Stats that matter are -
Crit Multiplier
Crit Range
1 handed/2 handed (for Str bonus and Power Attack)
Weapon Finnessable
Light/1 handed (for 2WF penalities)
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
