No. You can perfectly make a shield a +5 Weapon without using spikes to do so. It is a weapon, it has its own listing.
And yes, you can build a shield with a +20 Enhancement if you want to lay out the dough. An Uber SHield is defined as a Spiked Heavy Shield +5 of Bashing with +5 Defender. If a Large Shield, 2-12 20/x2, +7 AC, +12 AC in Melee. If you have SHield Mastery, it's +5 TH/DMG even with defender going all AC.
Cost is 108,000 GP for +6/+6 of Enhancements. Having 300k to top of your shield is an impressive concentration of your wealth...
Armor is not a weapon in its own right, so enchanting it as armor without spikes doesn't work. You do need the spikes to enchant armor as a weapon.
==Aelryinth
Shields are weapons as per the bash rules you quoted. You wouldn't need spikes to enchant it as a weapon, but the spikes to increase the damage die size. The "weapon" and "shield" side of the shield can each be enchanted independently and really have nothing to do with each other, so you aren't getting a +20 item, just a +10 shield and a +10 weapon (either on the shield itself or the spikes) that happen to share the same space.
If I'm wrong then I'm sure someone will point it out with rules references, but I'm pretty sure that's how it goes.
I'd say the Shield Spikes and the enchanted-as-weapon Shield are two different weapons in the eyes of the rules even though they are attached; so you attack with the spikes or the shield and they don't interact at all.
"An enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but a spiked shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right."
I think you're misreading this line. There is no "spikes" and "shield", there is only the "spiked shield". They are a single weapon and a single armor (for the purposes of enhancements). From how you're talking, it looks like you're identifying "spikes" as the weapon part and "shield" as the armor part. You cannot put frost on armor, only on a weapon. But I think you probably understand that.
I think you're more likely thinking that you actually have two different shield bashes: spiked and traditional blunt bash. This is not true. You only have the spiked shield's bash. When the line says "an enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash with it" they are talking about the armor magic enhancement not applying to the one and only shield bash you can make with a spiked shield, as this line is part of the armor entry for the shield. When you start enhancing a shield (regular or spiked) as a weapon and as a piece of armor, it essentially becomes two different items in one. You pay for the weapon enhancement and the armor enhancement independently.
I hope that makes sense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No. You can perfectly make a shield a +5 Weapon without using spikes to do so. It is a weapon, it has its own listing.
And yes, you can build a shield with a +20 Enhancement if you want to lay out the dough. An Uber SHield is defined as a Spiked Heavy Shield +5 of Bashing with +5 Defender. If a Large Shield, 2-12 20/x2, +7 AC, +12 AC in Melee. If you have SHield Mastery, it's +5 TH/DMG even with defender going all AC.
Cost is 108,000 GP for +6/+6 of Enhancements. Having 300k to top of your shield is an impressive concentration of your wealth...
Armor is not a weapon in its own right, so enchanting it as armor without spikes doesn't work. You do need the spikes to enchant armor as a weapon.
==Aelryinth
No, you can't have a +20 item. The hard cap is +10, that's it, you can't break it unless you have a specific exception (i.e. from an Artifact power) to do so. You either have a Shield, or you have a Shield with Spikes, you can't enchant solely the Spikes, nor are they defined as a separate item in the Weapons table. (They are, however, classified as an add-on, since they add weight, gold, and extra rules to the already-existing shield you are creating/purchasing, instead of being a stand-alone item.)
That being said, you CAN apply a +5 AC Bashing shield and still be able to apply weapon special abilities, as per RAW, you only need to have a +1 Enhancement to apply a +1 property (it's not specific as to which "type" of enhancement is on the item in question), plus the Bashing weapon says it bashes (attacks) as a +1 weapon, as well as fulfills all of the other adjustments of a +1 property (increased hardness and hit points, overcomes DR/Magic, etc)., meaning for all intents and purposes, it's not fundamentally different from having a +1 weapon property altogether. (I made a thread about it here, explaining it. The relevance to this one is quite uncanny.)
I will also point out that the Defending property sacrifices the Weapon's Enhancement Bonus (+1 from Bashing, tops) to apply to your AC. Simply sacrificing it from +5 to your AC to +5 to your AC does nothing except make you have 5 less to your attack and damage rolls, since you no longer have an Enhancement Bonus to AC, you have an AC bonus that stacks with all others; it's the exact reason why it's not an Armor property, because it fundamentally changes nothing (and in the cases of Shield Master, it actually makes you worse).
If it helps, think of the "weapon" side of a shield bash as a slip-cover that gets put on your shield. No matter what the shield has on it, (spikes, mirrors, a picture of a dragon, a picture of your mother, a picture of your dragon's mother) the "weapon" is a completely separate entity, a thin coating of Latex (and possibly studs, spikes, or french ticklers) that goes over the shield.
No, it doesn't, because it doesn't make any sense, both mechanically and realistically.
Mechanically, Shields and Spiked Shields are classified as two completely separate items in the Weapon Table. This is also true for Gauntlets and Spiked Gauntlets, as well as a Dagger and a Punching Dagger. The examples can go on, but you see the point (hopefully).
In addition, the Armor table says for Shield Spikes that it costs "+10 GP," and lists "+5 lbs." for weight, whereas other subjects simply say "9 GP," and "6 lbs." Any rational human being would tell you that the former is a rider cost (that is, in addition to something else) that cannot be purchased separately. Anyone saying otherwise didn't read or interpret it correctly, since the spikes themselves cannot be made into weapons or armor in their own right, as they have no statistics to cover that, they simply alter an existing item to serve as a (better) weapon.
Realistically, simply treating shield spikes as a "slip-cover" reduces their lasting function that they are supposed to have. Taking a good look at this rendition of a three dimensional Spiked Tower Shield, it visibly shows us how the spikes and studs are melded into the actual shield. Even if they are not welded onto metal like the studs are, they are, at the very least, screwed into the wooden sockets that were drilled in. Trying to treat it like a phone's battery case is not valid, given the technological discrepancy, as well as the exclusive purpose of the subjects.
A D10 would be more favorable, since it has a higher maximum and is easier to max out. However, the RAW is correct, since the scale originally starts from 1D6 with a Spiked Heavy Shield, increasing 2 sizes goes to 1D8, then as per a Large Longsword (AKA Greatsword), 1D8 to 2D6. The sad part is? With all of those people complaining, I never see players take the shield route. (I want to at some point and I have a killer character concept in line, but it will be a while...)
No. You can perfectly make a shield a +5 Weapon without using spikes to do so. It is a weapon, it has its own listing.
And yes, you can build a shield with a +20 Enhancement if you want to lay out the dough. An Uber SHield is defined as a Spiked Heavy Shield +5 of Bashing with +5 Defender. If a Large Shield, 2-12 20/x2, +7 AC, +12 AC in Melee. If you have SHield Mastery, it's +5 TH/DMG even with defender going all AC.
Cost is 108,000 GP for +6/+6 of Enhancements. Having 300k to top of your shield is an impressive concentration of your wealth...
Armor is not a weapon in its own right, so enchanting it as armor without spikes doesn't work. You do need the spikes to enchant armor as a weapon.
==Aelryinth
No, you can't have a +20 item. The hard cap is +10, that's it, you can't break it unless you have a specific exception (i.e. from an Artifact power) to do so. You either have a Shield, or you have a Shield with Spikes, you can't enchant solely the Spikes, nor are they defined as a separate item in the Weapons table. (They are, however, classified as an add-on, since they add weight, gold, and extra rules to the already-existing shield you are creating/purchasing, instead of being a stand-alone item.)
That being said, you CAN apply a +5 AC Bashing shield and still be able to apply weapon special abilities, as per RAW, you only need to have a +1 Enhancement to apply a +1 property (it's not specific as to which "type" of enhancement is on the item in question), plus the Bashing weapon says it bashes (attacks) as a +1 weapon, as well as fulfills all of the other adjustments of a +1 property (increased hardness and hit points, overcomes DR/Magic, etc)., meaning for all intents and purposes, it's not fundamentally different from having a +1 weapon property altogether. (I made a thread about it here, explaining it. The relevance to this one is quite uncanny.)
I will also...
And you are wrong.
You can very, very easily have +20 items. A double weapon with 10/10 on each head. Armor +10 with Armor Spikes +10. And a Shield +10 with +10 Weapon enhancements.
They are treated completely independently of one another, while you are trying to agglomerate them. Weapon and Armor Enhancements have never affected one another, and don't do so now.
You are correct in that Bashing and Weapon enhancement don't stack...except for the fact a bashing shield does damage as if two sizes larger, AND +1 to a shield is half the cost of +1 to a weapon.
Shield Master turns a shield's ARMOR enhancement into a functioning Weapon Enhancement.
Defender turns a Weapon Enhancement into an AC bonus.
Using the feat with a Defender shield means you reduce the weapon Enhancement of your shield to +0, giving you +5 typeless AC. Shield Master then uses the Shield Enhancement of +5 as if it were a Weapon Enhancement, too. So you end up with +12 of AC and a +5 Bashing Shield.
This has been true since 3E, and Paizo has changed nothing about this combination. It works just fine.
==Aelryinth
Double Weapons still follow the same +10 Base Price Bonus rule. However, for the purposes of magic items, each haft is enchanted separately. Neither haft has higher than a +11 Base Price Bonus, much less would you count the item as having a +20 Base Price Bonus for sundering terms.
You might have a case when it comes to Armor Spikes, though I will point out that the rules for Armor Spikes follow the same route that Shield Spikes tread; they are treated and calculated as riders to another standard purchase, meaning they aren't actually weapons in and of themselves.
Relevant text:
You can outfit your armor with spikes, which can deal damage in a grapple or as a separate attack.
Armor spikes deal extra piercing damage (see “spiked armor” on Table: Weapons) on a successful grapple attack. The spikes count as a martial weapon. If you are not proficient with them, you take a –4 penalty on grapple checks when you try to use them. You can also make a regular melee attack (or off-hand attack) with the spikes, and they count as a light weapon in this case. (You can't also make an attack with armor spikes if you have already made an attack with another off-hand weapon, and vice versa.) An enhancement bonus to a suit of armor does not improve the spikes' effectiveness, but the spikes can be made into magic weapons in their own right.
Again, you might have a case, but conflicting RAW, similar (though very slightly different) item conception, and table information work against your interpretation. The same can be said for my argument, though it is less conflicting than yours.
Yes, they do stack, and for all intents and purposes for magic enhancements, the Bashing property fulfills all of the duties required for a +1 Weapon; it has the increased hit points, hardness, and adds that amount to attack and damage rolls as an Enhancement Bonus. Ergo, I can have a +5 (AC) Bashing Shield that can have up to +4 in Weapon Special Abilities.
Here's the relevant text for Shield Master:
Add your shield’s enhancement bonus to attack and damage rolls made with the shield as if it were a weapon enhancement bonus.
The Shield's Armor Enhancement Bonus doesn't get turned into a functional Weapon Enhancement, nor does it fully function as a +X Weapon in this manner. You simply add your Shield's Armor Enhancement Bonus to your attack and damage rolls as if it were an enhancement bonus to a weapon (i.e. it counts as an Enhancement Bonus for all intents and purposes of stacking and the like).
It is not a functioning enhancement bonus like the Bashing property is, since it doesn't increase hardness or hit points of the shield in question. You also double-dip on the supposed "Weapon Enhancement" you get from Shield Master, since, in order to get +5 from the Defending, you need a +5 Weapon Enhancement, which isn't derived until you "transmute" it from the Shield Master bonuses.
**EDIT**
@boring7: You brought up how shield spikes could just be slipped on and off like a phone case. I thoroughly explained in both game rules and physics how it simply doesn't work that way. If that wasn't what you were discussing, then I apologize, but all signs pointed that way to me.
If that errata comes to pass, Shield Martials are going down the toilet, and fast. The entire point of going a Shield Martial was to have an almost-impenetrable defense with an equally-competent offense compared to that of any other melee worth his salt.
At any rate, the source link doesn't work, and D20 site isn't exactly an official place to look for updated content (they are a tad slow on rules errata/FAQs, as they have explained in a thread previously), so I'm not too worried until it's actually shown in the PRD or in the official FAQ.
...I thought it was a description of a phone case...
In either event, as a combined item, Spiked Shields simply can't and don't work the same way a Double weapon does.
I did say that Armor Spikes may be an exception, since Armor itself cannot be made into a weapon (without some other outside help, of course). However, Spiked Shields don't share that same language, despite its similarities:
An enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but a spiked shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.
Comparing, the bolded part is the key difference; it specifically refers to the shield being spiked, not the spikes on the shield themselves in the case of Armor Spikes.
That being said, I am overlooking the balancing factor of WBL, though by the endgame, WBL goes out the window, more-or-less.
Shield Martial, in this case, refers to, as you put it, "dude who uses a shield as a weapon." Mine, however, uses 2 shields. (Re-reading it, I can probably go to being Dexterity-based and have Agile Light Shields with Weapon Finesse, though not getting full Dexterity on my off-hand really bites.) He can also cast spells as a 9th level Ranger with access to Haste, Rage as a Barbarian with Pounce while raging as a Capstone, Evasion, and he maintains being full BAB.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Hero Lab is a 3rd party product, and as such isn't a credible source for rule arguments. It's about as credible a rule source as 3.X books are.
By RAW, I don't have to have +1 to attack and damage rolls to apply weapon special abilities. RAI, the +1 to attack and damage rolls, as well as the increased hit points and hardness for having a +1 base price bonus increase, is simulated with the Bashing property. Conversely, I can have +1 to attack and damage rolls on a shield, and I can apply armor special abilities. Why? Because RAW, it doesn't specify what kind of enhancement bonus you have, merely that you have a +1 Enhancement Bonus minimum.
Just because you calculate the Weapon-type properties and Armor/Shield-type properties separately doesn't give you specific permission to exceed the +10 bonus on an item. Double Weapons are different in that you are granted specific permission to apply +10 to a given haft, and that the properties on one haft are not transferred to the other haft
The rules regarding Double Weapons, even in a similar scenario you try to make up (instead of two hafts, you have a shield and its spikes), cannot apply to Spiked Shields because 1. They lack the Double weapon property, meaning they cannot possibly utilize that kind of exception, and 2. Shields and their Spikes are considered one item, period. The description of Shield Spikes in the Armor table is conclusive proof of this, versus the description of Armor Spikes, which specifically list the Spikes themselves being able to be enchanted as a weapon.
I am aware that you don't get 2 sets of AC bonuses from two shields. But reviewing the Shield Master feat, you suffer no TWF penalties to attack rolls made with shields. Using 2 shields for your attacks equates to 0 TWF penalties on all my attacks, meaning I can swing around with 8 attacks with at-worst Power Attack penalties on a regular basis, each shield by RAW dealing 2D6 + Power Attack + Dexterity modifier for each attack that is a hit, not including the +5 I'd get from Shield Master, as well as the chance to make a free attack with each critical hit I make with a shield (at a 19-20 Critical Modifier thanks to Improved Critical [Light Shield]).
Quickdraw Light Shields with the Quick Draw feat allow me to don and remove said shields as a Free Action, meaning I can hold a shield in one of my Light Shield hands, leaving a hand free to cast spells, all the while being able to put it back on as a Free Action in the same round. Although it adds an additional Armor Check Penalty, this can be fixed by using Darkwood as the material. I can also make them Throwing Quickdraw Light Shields, making me effective at both melee and range, using Dexterity for Attack and Damage rolls, since a Shield still qualifies as being a Melee Weapon for the purposes of the Agile property.
So at 20th level with Pounce, I can Rage (Free Action), Unequip Light Shield (Free Action), Take out Lesser Quicken Metamagic Rod via Gloves of Storing (Free Action), cast Quickened Haste via Metamagic Rod (Swift Action), return the Lesser Quicken Metamagic Rod back into the glove (Free Action), Don the unequipped Shield (Free Action), and get a Charging Full Attack (Full Round Action) all in a single round. (Against Casters, I can probably substitute Haste for Silence, as that's another spell I get access to, so I can shut them down on the spot.)
Just as a note, Weapon Enhancement buffs, such as Courageous or Furious, won't affect the Shield Mastery bonus, since they enhance the weapon side and not the shield side.
However, there IS an armor enhancement now that grants +2 AC against a specific foe (popular in the Worldwound). Can't remember the name. So you can back-end yourself into a +7 Shield with Shield Master.
Damage dice bonuses from the Weapon Side WILL stack with the shield side. So you could get the +2d6 dice from Bane, +2d6 from Holy and +1d6 from Flaming, but the +2/+2 from Bane would be wasted.
==Aelryinth
Um, is unequipping a shield a free action? I only thought that applied if you dropped it. Don't have the text for quick draw shields in front of me, but I thought it was only a free action to equip them...and they had to be properly stowed for that to happen.
==Aelryinth
@ boring7: That's just how it is. If it was from Paizo themselves, then I'd concede.
From the PRD under Magic Armor and Shields:
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.
Notice that the first part says the cost of adding enhancement bonus would need to be added as part of the cost. Also, the second part makes no clarification as to whether the +X is from a Weapon property or Armor/Shield property, meaning the +10 capacity applies to either one.
If you looked at that part closely, it says Double Weapons are calculated as being two weapons for the listed exceptions. It otherwise follows the rules of being a single weapon. (For the record, I use the term "haft" to differentiate which part of the Double weapon has what properties and such, and is the same term used in multiple Special Material entries.)
From the PRD under Magic Weapons:
A single weapon cannot have a modified bonus (enhancement bonus plus special ability bonus equivalents, including those from character abilities and spells) higher than +10.
Since it's calculated as two weapons for special abilities and cost purposes (combined), either haft can have up to a +10, and no higher unless there is some specific rule that trumps such, which is usually only present in Artifacts.
I've already explained it profusely how Shield Spikes cannot possibly function the same as you would treat a Double Weapon for the purposes of enhancing. Whether you choose to accept them or not is your call, and we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I thought my explanation regarding "it adds together" would answer your question. But you apparently refuse to read into it. Fine, I'll jump through your hoops, if only because you have no legs to jump with it seems.
When I make take a +1 bashing shield
Okay. So you have 4,000 golds worth of Armor special properties there, counting as a +2 Base Price Bonus for the purposes of being able to apply special abilities.
and add the corrosive quality
You want to add a Corrosive property? Many people would tell you that you'd have to spend a +1 Base Price Bonus to apply a +1 Weapon Enhancement before you can add a weapon special ability. Ask around, and you'll see.
Lucky for you, I'm not one of those people.
does it cost 14k or does it cost 5k?
The answer is neither.
If "the cost of the enhancement bonus on attack rolls would need to be added into the cost of the...enhancement bonus to AC," when you're making "a shield...that also acted as a magic weapon," your calculations end up invalidating one or the other Base Price Bonus tables, when that's not what the book is saying at all. You add the costs together.
So you have a +1(AC) Bashing in Armor properties, valued at 4K. You then have the Corrosive property, valued at 2K. You take the second value, and you need to add it to the cost of the first value, result in a total of 6K; it's no different than having a material component cost added to the value of a given item's cost or price. Count 1 for not reading through the entry and applying what it says.
And now you're making up self-contradictory rules again. the quoted text does not say a double weapon is calculated as two weapons for the purposes of its modified bonus, only for the cost, time and special abilities. According to your position on shields, a double weapon can never go above a modified +5 because it's still a single weapon.
The first bolded part is included when calculating modified abilities. Re-read the passage again.
A single weapon cannot have a modified bonus (enhancement bonus plus special ability bonus equivalents, including those from character abilities and spells) higher than +10.
It specifically calls out Special Abilities as being part of a modified bonus that you say the rules don't cover, scaling out to a hard cap of +10 (barring Artifacts). Re-reading your quoted text:
Creating magic double-headed weapons is treated as creating two weapons when determining cost, time, and special abilities.
As it says, for special abilities (which includes enhancement bonuses), it counts as 2 weapons. That being said, the chart never goes beyond a +10 modifier. So even if you tried to make it a +11, how much would you charge for that? Do you just eyeball it and call it good? Hardly a proper rules answer, nor is it really an official one either.
Or, maybe, you apply common sense, and assume that the Double Weapon just treats each head (or haft) as a single weapon that you enhance, making the enhancing rules so much simpler? As practically everyone on this forum will tell you (including the Devs), this is how it's ran.
So count 2 for not reading the entry clearly enough.
And what do Shields and Double Weapons have to do with each other? Is a Shield, or even a Spiked Shield, a Double-Headed Weapon? No. Does it have the Double weapon property? No. Can I TWF with using just a single (spiked) shield to fulfill both my main-hand and off-hand weapon? No. Ergo, Shields, even Spiked Shields, cannot possibly follow those exceptions, unless you're grossly overlooking those subjects. Since you seem to think they do, that's count 3 for not reading it through.
It's a good thing you're wrong, or we'd all be totally confused.
Weapon and armor enhancements have always been priced and treated differently, and their limits applied differently. Now you're trying to introduce a crazy patchquilt instead of the simple and direct means of treating them as separate additions. I can't imagine the pricing problems that would erupt if your method was true.
==Aelryinth
It's a good thing you're wrong, or we'd all be totally confused.
Weapon and armor enhancements have always been priced and treated differently, and their limits applied differently. Now you're trying to introduce a crazy patchquilt instead of the simple and direct means of treating them as separate additions. I can't imagine the pricing problems that would erupt if your method was true.
==Aelryinth
I'm glad following the RAW confuses you, since that seems to be what you take issue with, as that's all I'm extrapolating with here.
Both Armor/Shield and Weapon follow very similar, if not completely identical, rules. Base Price Bonus increases each follow a specific formula. You need a +1 enhancement (doesn't specify, so any kind of +1 could work in the case of a Shield) to apply special abilities, and you can't beat the hard cap of +10 through any basic means (Artifacts being an exception). This is universal among those subjects.
Shields can be enhanced as both an Armor item and a Weapon item. But Shields don't have any rules that allow them to circumvent them being over a +10 weapon item or +10 armor item. I'll also point out that while items don't specify what kind of +1 enhancement you get (in the case of shields), either event says a single weapon/armor cannot have a bonus higher than +10, regardless of where the source came from (again, Artifacts are an exception, and Double Weapons have a slight difference when it comes to this rule).
I also want you to explain to me how there would be confusion with pricing as well as the problems they could possibly present, and give examples as to how that's the case. I'll gladly solve all of these supposed "problems" that you think exist, even though I already solved Boring7's, which he didn't even calculate the total price properly, because he didn't read the rules I listed from the PRD correctly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a good thing you're wrong, or we'd all be totally confused.
Weapon and armor enhancements have always been priced and treated differently, and their limits applied differently. Now you're trying to introduce a crazy patchquilt instead of the simple and direct means of treating them as separate additions. I can't imagine the pricing problems that would erupt if your method was true.
==Aelryinth
I'm glad following the RAW confuses you, since that seems to be what you take issue with, as that's all I'm extrapolating with here.
Both Armor/Shield and Weapon follow very similar, if not completely identical, rules. Base Price Bonus increases each follow a specific formula. You need a +1 enhancement (doesn't specify, so any kind of +1 could work in the case of a Shield) to apply special abilities, and you can't beat the hard cap of +10 through any basic means (Artifacts being an exception). This is universal among those subjects.
Shields can be enhanced as both an Armor item and a Weapon item. But Shields don't have any rules that allow them to circumvent them being over a +10 weapon item or +10 armor item. I'll also point out that while items don't specify what kind of +1 enhancement you get (in the case of shields), either event says a single weapon/armor cannot have a bonus higher than +10, regardless of where the source came from (again, Artifacts are an exception, and Double Weapons have a slight difference when it comes to this rule).
I also want you to explain to me how there would be confusion with pricing as well as the problems they could possibly present, and give examples as to how that's the case. I'll gladly solve all of these supposed "problems" that you think exist, even though I already solved Boring7's, which he didn't even calculate the total price properly, because he didn't read the rules I listed from the PRD correctly.
That's right, you're extrapolating, you're not reading. You wandered down the road of personal interpretation of corner cases in the English language and you're telling the rest of us we don't know how to read.
By your rules, having a +10 shield with a weapon enhancement is impossible...it will violate the 100k limit of +10 armor. Because, you know, you can't restrict one rule and then break another, right?
By your rules, is adding +Flaming to a +3 Shield possible? It's not enhanced as a weapon yet. But you're saying it is, since it counts towards the +10. So now you've introduced stacking questions that, you know, DON'T ACTUALLY HAPPEN.
What's the price? Are you starting at +1 for the weapon side? That's not right, it's the 4th enhancement, and by your rules, they stack. So, now, WHEN I put the enhancement on makes a difference. Flaming on a +1 Weapon-side shield is 6k. Flaming on a +2 Bashing armor-side is...what? 2k? 14k?
Guess what? Those timing questions NEVER HAPPEN either. Because it's irrelevant.
They don't apply, because armor enhancements are always treated separate from weapon, and you just follow the pricing rules side by side.
Always.
So a shield is a +10/+10 item, just like a double weapon. It's function as a weapon is completely separate from its function as armor. The only place they overlap is hardness and hit points and guess what? They are both enhancement bonuses and don't stack, so it's moot.
I get where you are coming from, but you are flat out WRONG. It's not an opinion, it's not a suddenly insightful reading of the rules, it's you taking something out of context without taking into consideration other existing rules. You're just wrong, dude. And you saying that everyone else, including the people who wrote the rules, have been wrong for nigh on twenty years is making the rest of us kind of laugh.
You are making the pricing schema unnecessarily complicated, and are quite literally ignoring 20 years of the game saying "Armor and Weapon enhancements are treated separately on the same item."
We now return you to your regularly scheduled debate.
==Aelryinth
That's right, you're extrapolating, you're not reading. You wandered down the road of personal interpretation of corner cases in the English language and you're telling the rest of us we don't know how to read.
By your rules, having a +10 shield with a weapon enhancement is impossible...it will violate the 100k limit of +10 armor. Because, you know, you can't restrict one rule and then break another, right?
By your rules, is adding +Flaming to a +3 Shield possible? It's not enhanced as a weapon yet. But you're saying it is, since it counts towards the +10. So now you've introduced stacking questions that, you know, DON'T ACTUALLY HAPPEN.
What's the price? Are you starting at +1 for the weapon side? That's not right, it's the 4th enhancement, and by your rules, they stack. So, now, WHEN I put the enhancement on makes a difference. Flaming on a +1 Weapon-side shield is 6k. Flaming on a +2 Bashing armor-side is...what? 2k? 14k?
Guess what? Those timing questions NEVER HAPPEN either. Because it's irrelevant.
They don't apply, because armor enhancements are always treated separate from weapon, and you just follow the pricing rules side by side.
Always.
So a shield is a +10/+10 item, just like a double weapon. It's function as a weapon is completely separate from its function as armor. The only place they overlap is hardness and hit points and guess what? They are both enhancement bonuses and don't stack, so it's moot.
I get where you are coming from, but you are flat out WRONG. It's not an opinion, it's not a suddenly insightful reading of the rules, it's you taking something out of context without taking into consideration other existing rules. You're just wrong, dude. And you saying that everyone else, including the people who wrote the rules, have been wrong for nigh on twenty years is making the rest of us kind of laugh.
You are making the pricing schema unnecessarily complicated, and are quite literally ignoring 20 years of the game saying "Armor and Weapon enhancements are treated separately on the same item."
The differences between RAW and RAI are obvious enough to determine whether it's RAW or RAI. I'll re-read the stacking sentence(s) again and point out the RAW and how I reflect it:
A single weapon cannot have a modified bonus (enhancement bonus plus special ability bonus equivalents, including those from character abilities and spells) higher than +10.
A suit of armor cannot have an effective bonus (enhancement plus special ability bonus equivalents, including those from character abilities and spells) higher than +10.
A shield cannot have an effective bonus (enhancement plus special ability bonus equivalents) higher than +10.
The sentence structures are almost identical when put side-by-side, so we can assume that the rule for one is equal to the rule applied to the others. For simplicity purposes, I'll reference the Weapon section mostly.
As you can tell, it says that a single given weapon (barring Double Weapons and Artifacts, as they have special exceptions to this rule) cannot have a modified bonus (what that "modified bonus" encompasses is included in the parentheses) over +10. Period. That's it. It also makes no specific mention as to what types of effective bonus can be applied (given that it's assumed for weapons). This is reflected in the Armor section, meaning that both Armor and Weapons share the same restriction. A Shield counts as both for enhancing, so by rights, you could effectively make it a +10 Armor and a +10 Weapon.
However, the Shield entry is the biggest giveaway as to why I say it works the way I say it does. That section has the same exact sentence structure regarding both Armor and Shields. If it is treated as having separate Armor and Enhancement bonuses, why state whether the Shield itself has a +10 limit, when by rights, it would simply combine those restrictions? That alone leaves me one of two possible interpretations of that section:
1. The Shield must be constructed as either an armor item or a weapon item, and once the decision is made, it cannot be changed (less likely interpretation).
2. A Shield's enhancement bonus origin, nor their respective level isn't relevant to the general "+10 is it" rule (more likely interpretation). The bonuses themselves are combined for a grand total, as is evident by "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."
So, going with the more conservative and sensible interpretation, RAW, +X limits aren't specific as to whether they're Weapon enhancements or Armor enhancements, simply that they are enhancements. The bonuses themselves are combined for a grand total, as is evident by "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."
With this, I assume that having a Shield that has an effective +6 in Armor enhancements and an effective +4 in Weapon enhancements still equates to being a +10 item, which it cannot surpass unless it's a Double weapon (boring7 still thinks it is, apparently), or an Artifact.
I'll also point out that the enlarged sentence answers the question as to whether you need to have a +1 Weapon or +1 Armor enhancement to add special abilities. The answer? The book doesn't specify, so either kind would work. If the book doesn't specify, why should we?
Aaaaand you're doing that interpolation thing again.
A shield is, by default, treated as an armor bonus.
A weapon is referred to by itself, and even if acting as armor, is IRRELEVANT.
Armor enhancement bonuses refer to enhancements on the armor, even if it is serving as a weapon. Enhancement bonuses to armor have NO effect on a weapon. Ditto on the other side.
So, they are simply declaring a weapon can have +10 of enhancement bonuses AS A WEAPON, and armor can have +10 of enhancement bonuses AS ARMOR.
And a shield defaults to being armor, but CAN be a weapon, just like spiked armor CAN be a weapon.
And ARMOR and WEAPON enhancements exist on TWO TABLES, separate, NOT JOINED, NOT STACKING.
If your logic held true, they'd all share the same table, which they don't.
Seriously, man, do you think you're having an original idea? This argument was beaten into the dirt over ten years ago!
As for playing at my table..sure, come on. You don't see dual shield wielding builds because a) the damage as a weapon is crap and b) investing 600k into two items sounds good until you realize that's 70% of the WBL of a level 20 character, and getting either of them sundered would really, really suck. Oh, and the shield bonuses don't stack. And TWF still sucks, even worse with an inferior weapon like a shield.
Do you realize how feat intensive a shield spec TWF'ing build is for sucky damage?
You MIGHT invest 300k into one large shield, which is an okay weapon ...but inferior to a greatsword/any real 2h weapon for damage, and takes like level 14 to come online as an uber shield, if not later. So not only does it suck vs a standard weapon, but you have to wait that much longer for it to be a decent weapon, because, well, you have so much money you have to pump into it, and other 2h builds don't worry about that.
==Aelryinth
a shield bonus is considered an extension of the armor bonus, which is why I noted it that way. They do stack, but stuff that ignores armor bonuses pretty much universally ignores shield bonuses too.
==Aelryinth
Aaaaand you're doing that interpolation thing again.
How else does one truly read then? Quite frankly, everything that is read requires extrapolation so as to comprehend the purpose behind the text, and saying I'm "extrapolating," a quintessential part of reading and comprehension, "instead of reading," which is a term used to comprehend the extrapolation from symbols like text and words, is what one gathers from reading something is what one extrapolates from the text.
In other words, you're doing the same thing I'm doing too, even right now as you're glossing over this post. Being a pot and calling the kettle black doesn't help your case any more than it helps mine.
A shield is, by default, treated as an armor bonus.
A weapon is referred to by itself, and even if acting as armor, is IRRELEVANT.
Armor enhancement bonuses refer to enhancements on the armor, even if it is serving as a weapon. Enhancement bonuses to armor have NO effect on a weapon. Ditto on the other side.
I've never debated this point. Texts specifically stated whether the spikes themselves (Armor Spikes) can be enhanced, or the item that has spikes on it (Spiked Shield) can be enhanced as weapons in their own right, and from what I gather, you find those texts irrelevant.
So, they are simply declaring a weapon can have +10 of enhancement bonuses AS A WEAPON, and armor can have +10 of enhancement bonuses AS ARMOR.
And a shield defaults to being armor, but CAN be a weapon, just like spiked armor CAN be a weapon.
Actually, Armor Spikes are an item that have to be enhanced as weapons themselves without affecting the Armor bonuses themselves, simply because of the line that says Enhancement Bonuses to Armor does not make the Spikes better, but you can enhance the Spikes to make them a magic weapon in their own right.
RAW, Shields, while they have similar language, don't make the distinction of the Spikes on the shield being a separate entity, unlike the Armor Spikes entry, which does.
And ARMOR and WEAPON enhancements exist on TWO TABLES, separate, NOT JOINED, NOT STACKING.
If your logic held true, they'd all share the same table, which they don't.
You can very, very easily have +20 items. A double weapon with 10/10 on each head. Armor +10 with Armor Spikes +10. And a Shield +10 with +10 Weapon enhancements.
I think you just contradicted yourself there. You've said previously that you can have an effective +20 item in question, but now you say the effects cannot be joined or stacked together? Sounds like you don't even know what side you're explaining.
You're also ignoring the exceptions of the Shields section that supersede that general rule of being on separate, unrelated tables; which I specifically quoted from the PRD, that doesn't specify as to what kind of Enhancement Bonus you need to apply either kind of special abilities. I'll reference it again, since skipping over things seems to be an acceptable way to win arguments; I'll even throw in the 3.5 version, so as to do a side by side comparison.
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 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 have at least a +1 enhancement bonus.
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.
They both say the same thing in their respective entries. They both state that "A shield cannot have an effective bonus...higher than +10."
Now, Question: Why does it refer to the shield itself as having a +10 hard cap, when, according to you, you can enhance a shield as both an armor and a weapon, and their bonuses are mutually exclusive?
That must be filler text if you're correct; if so, why didn't the company just cut that out and put in a pretty picture or more relevant rules text? Doesn't make any sense otherwise.
Seriously, man, do you think you're having an original idea? This argument was beaten into the dirt over ten years ago!
There are several things that have changed from 3.5 to Pathfinder that many people have overlooked, even argued against that change. Monk FoB, Two-Handed Weapon + Armor Spikes for TWF, and multiple other things have changed from the system you claimed the arguments originated from. Simply saying the subject was argued for a long time only proves to me that the Devs at the time didn't want to make a ruling on the matter and left it for the players to decide, and that to this day, there is no definitive intent given to us outside of what the RAW says and GM FIAT, the former being a much more arbitrary and credible source of game rules than GM FIAT.
As for playing at my table..sure, come on. You don't see dual shield wielding builds because a) the damage as a weapon is crap and b) investing 600k into two items sounds good until you realize that's 70% of the WBL of a level 20 character, and getting either of them sundered would really, really suck. Oh, and the shield bonuses don't stack. And TWF still sucks, even worse with an inferior weapon like a shield.
Do you realize how feat intensive a shield spec TWF'ing build is for sucky damage?
You MIGHT invest 300k into one large shield, which is an okay weapon ...but inferior to a greatsword/any real 2h weapon for damage, and takes like level 14 to come online as an uber shield, if not later. So not only does it suck vs a standard weapon, but you have to wait that much longer for it to be a decent weapon, because, well, you have so much money you have to pump into it, and other 2h builds don't worry about that.
Crappy damage? Somebody doesn't optimize their damage too well if you're trying to use weapon damage dice as the main source of damage dealing, especially with a TWF build. Such builds work best with Natural Weapons from a Colossal+-sized creature with GVS. Everybody on the forums knows that static damage is key, even moreso with a Critical Hit builds. Nice try on that.
Feat intensive? Not for a Ranger who can skip pre-reqs. Shield Master by 6th level is pretty nice, and I can stand the -2 from TWF until then, since I'll still have amazing to-hit. The damage won't come online until that point anyway, and many things don't have DR until you get 8th level or so. Did I also mention I can cast Haste and Silence for my party by 10th level and get Pounce as a 20th capstone?
To be honest with you, two shields at an effective +9 enhancement bonus is all that's really required for basic optimization, since you would have 2 +5 (AC) Bashing Agile Furious Courageous Light Shields with 7 or 8 attacks and all the fixings, having decent static bonuses to damage. Even in the lower levels, a +1 Agile Light Shield with all the fixings will only cost me a little under 4,000 gold a piece.
By my calculations, that one +9 shield would cost me only 54,000 gold; 36,000 in armor properties, 18,000 in weapon properties; anything else is completely optional. So a 50,000 gold jump per shield, is hardly a problem by the endgame, and is in line with a +10 two-handed weapon.
All the while maintaining a solid AC (and Touch AC), unbeatable Reflex Saves (only way I can fail a difficult Reflex Save by 11th level is by not rolling a 1, and that's only going to increase), 30 movement, no TWF penalties, etc. etc. Try doing that with a Two-Hander, and they're just not going to be good at all.
You forgot Improved Shield Bash, to keep your Shield AC.
You forgot all the TWF feats. You're still spending feats to keep them, and you can't take them and the Shield Master line of feats at the same time. So, you're spending general feats.
EACH of those shields cost you 54k. That's 108k. That's level 14+ to acquire that much money for weapons/shields.
Rangers don't benefit from Courageous and Furious.
Light shields don't benefit from 2h Str or 2h Power Attack. And you need to take the Natural Attack totem line to get Pounce.
Light shields suck on single attacks. You can't charge and Pounce all the time.
Rangers still take level 6 to get Shield Master. When exactly are you grabbing all these uber barb levels and spellcasting on top of it?
The crappy damage from using a shield is that it's a 20/x2 weapon. If you want to do real damage, you need a higher threat range or a higher crit mod. It's a SIMPLE weapon, for all intents and purposes. A spiked Bashing light shield is a worse weapon then a LONGSWORD, without spending 4k in magic to make it viable.
You went and started stacking enhancement bonuses again, which is done nowhere else in the game. You want to cite a rule that specifically says that shields stack enhancement bonuses, you're fine.
Otherwise, that rule that you keep citing for +10 bonuses means that two non-stacking +10 bonuses do not violate the cap. When they stack, come see me. I could give the shield 50 different +10 enhancement bonuses, and as long as none of them stack, I'd be fine.
What you're arguing about that shields are not treated exactly like armor spikes is strange, dude. I mean, come on. The only other item which is weapon and defense at the same time, and you're basically saying that precedent and how they handle it doesn't apply. No, no, they have to make up rules which exist nowhere in the rules and get spun into place because you don't want weapon and armor enhancements to remain separate.
You cling to your interpolation and odd English. Ignore the dev rulings. Ignore precedent. Ignore published magic items discrediting what you are saying. Ignore ten years of custom.
It's fine, just don't expect the rest of us to believe you or go along with you. Because, well, you'll be wrong again.
===Aelryinth
You forgot Improved Shield Bash, to keep your Shield AC.
You forgot all the TWF feats. You're still spending feats to keep them, and you can't take them and the Shield Master line of feats at the same time. So, you're spending general feats.EACH of those shields cost you 54k. That's 108k. That's level 14+ to acquire that much money for weapons/shields.
Rangers don't benefit from Courageous and Furious.
Light shields don't benefit from 2h Str or 2h Power Attack. And you need to take the Natural Attack totem line to get Pounce.
Light shields suck on single attacks. You can't charge and Pounce all the time.
Rangers still take level 6 to get Shield Master. When exactly are you grabbing all these uber barb levels and spellcasting on top of it?The crappy damage from using a shield is that it's a 20/x2 weapon. If you want to do real damage, you need a higher threat range or a higher crit mod. It's a SIMPLE weapon, for all intents and purposes. A spiked Bashing light shield is a worse weapon then a LONGSWORD, without spending 4k in magic to make it viable.
You went and started stacking enhancement bonuses again, which is done nowhere else in the game. You want to cite a rule that specifically says that shields stack enhancement bonuses, you're fine.
Otherwise, that rule that you keep citing for +10 bonuses means that two non-stacking +10 bonuses do not violate the cap. When they stack, come see me. I could give the shield 50 different +10 enhancement bonuses, and as long as none of them stack, I'd be fine.
What you're arguing about that shields are not treated exactly like armor spikes is strange, dude. I mean, come on. The only other item which is weapon and defense at the same time, and you're basically saying that precedent and how they handle it doesn't apply. No, no, they have to make up rules which exist nowhere in the rules and get spun into place because you don't want weapon and armor enhancements to remain separate.
You cling to your interpolation and odd English. Ignore the dev...
Never ignored them, you just don't know how to calculate the feat progression. I get ISB and Weapon Finesse by 1st level (you can figure out how that works), TWF by 2nd level, Piranha Strike by 3rd level, Shield Master by 6th, Improved TWF by 7th, Bashing Finish by 10th (can get earlier, but other important feats, plus bonus feat slot by that point is quite limited), and Greater TWF by 11th. So, I get 3 off-hand attacks and 4 main-hand attacks, since by the time I hit 10th level, I get access to cast the Haste spell, at standard iterative BAB. I also get Bodyguard and In Harm's Way as Bonus Feats for free too, not to mention my Hunter's Bond basically makes both me and my caster friend practically invincible to melee attacks for a certain amount of rounds.
What else do you spend your general feats on as a 2H Martial? Extra Rage Power? Barbarians get Rage Powers every 2 levels, what's so damn good that you can't get both Spell Sunder and Pounce by the time you're 10th? Maybe Raging Vitality if you have the base Con for it?
Power Attack is a given for any martial, unless they're Dexterity based using Light weapons. In which case, Piranha Strike takes precedence, as it does here.
Extra LoH/Channel? Sure, if you're a Paladin or Cleric, but healing is frowned upon in games unless it's from the Heal spell, and Channel Smite is just plain bad form anyway.
Improved Initiative? Everybody gets that, good to know you have to take this feat just to be like everyone else.
Except, since I'm building Dexterity and use Light weapons, I can dump my Strength to 10, and increase my other statistics, but it's the same exact thing. If those feats are being spent for things like Iron Will (which I can get access to in fights by 3rd level), it's hardly a problem to spend feats on that sort of thing, since it seems there's nothing really build-breaking to not take.
You compare 54K for a single shield to 200+K for a single two-handed weapon. I'll have close to 100,000 gold in WBL in other items besides my weapon, meaning my secondary items will be a lot more prevalent.
And in hindsight, I shouldn't even get Light Spiked Shields, when a Klar deals 1D6 base damage and still functions as a Light Shield with Spikes, meaning I can enchant it as a shield, so the 2D6 damage it can deal from Bashing property (compared to a Heavy Spiked Shield, which does the same exact damage) is still in place. (Thanks for helping me notice that, the build got quite a bit stronger and cooler now.)
A Pure Ranger? No, they don't make use of them, and that was never stipulated. What you didn't seem to understand is that this isn't a pure Ranger. It's a 10 Infiltrator Witchguard Ranger/10 Invulnerable Urban Barbarian. By 11th level (about damn time) is when I get access to Urban Rage, being able to amplify my Dexterity to a +10 modifier by that level.
Rangers get access to spellcasting by 4th level. Then they can cast 2nd level spells by 7th, and 3rd level spells by 10th. Although they don't actually have any spells/day for 10th, any bonus points from your casting modifier (having a 16 Wisdom allows me to cast a 3rd level spell, i.e. Haste) still let you cast for the day.
I'll agree that I won't be pouncing all the time, but Barbarian Pounce is a very powerful ability by 10th level, the absolute earliest they can take it and is something that basically no other class can duplicate. At least I still get it as my 20th level capstone, which is about in-line with a Mobile Fighter's capstone, if not outright superior.
People don't use shields as weapons to Crit Fish with, nor is that the intent behind it (though Bashing Finish feat sure does support it). If Crit Fishing is all you're trying to do, who gives a damn about damage dice, when everybody knows the damage comes from static bonuses being multiplied, like your Strength and Power Attack and Enhancement bonuses?
If shields don't stack enhancement bonuses, and calculate them separately why does "that rule that [I] keep citing for +10 bonuses" not differentiate between what each kind of enhancement bonus is being applied? In the entry, an enhancement bonus is an enhancement bonus. You apply a +1 to AC, it's a +1 enhancement. You apply a +1 to Attack and Damage rolls, it's a +1 enhancement. You apply weapon special abilities, which require any kind of +1 enhancement, either AC, or attack and damage rolls.
The point of me linking that rule profusely is because that section specifically calls out Shields. Not referencing if it's enhanced as a Weapon, or enhanced as Armor, or whatever; but if the Shield is enhanced, the Shield's effective bonus (which includes "enhancement bonus plus special ability bonus equivalents"), which is not specific as to whether that total effective bonus applies to either Armor or Weapon properties. That tells me one thing: For shields, they're calculated into one number. It has to be, that's the general rule for enhancing, as evidenced by the rules for Double Weapons being enhanced, and there is no statement in that paragraph that mentions them being separate, or in any related section, because Shields, even Spiked Shields, aren't referenced as being 2 separate items to enhance, they are one item, period.
Spiked Armor, on the other hand, is referenced as being able to enhance two separate items, since the book says enhancing Armor does nothing to the Spikes, but you can be enhancing the Spikes, which does nothing to the Armor, since the Armor itself is not a weapon, the Spikes are. You can't say that about a Spiked Shield, since a Shield itself is an armor and a weapon, and spikes on a shield simply strengthen that weapon, which is also a source of armor.
I cling to my inference (a synonym of extrapolation, which you seem to be unable to spell correctly, or use that other word in mocking sense) because it hasn't been proven wrong yet, and as it sits, the case only gets stronger as your mocking just gets worse and worse, being even more politically incorrect with every post.
You haven't given one shred of evidence to discredit my claims other than "I and several other people have done that for the longest time, there's no way it can be wrong!" which, things have been quite inconsistent by RAW for the longest time, even though the RAI is so common knowledge it never became an issue except against Rules Lawyers, and "Devs said it works this way," which you have yet to post any source from a Dev in either Pathfinder or 3.5. You want to prove something to me, you throw your chips on the table and play out your hand; I already did, and I'm waiting for you to throw your cards out on the table. If I'm really full of crap, call the bluff and claim your victory. By all means, if you're holding back, don't do it on my behalf.
So, in your first paragraph, you violate the rules. A klar is a light spiked shield. That's it. And somehow you got a damage boost out of it?
A Klar is a one handed melee weapon, NOT a one handed light weapon (check the table). You can't finesse it without another feat. If you refer to the text, then you have to trash the table, and a light wooden shield is d4 and you don't get a damage boost. If you Bash with it, then you must use the default shield stats, and not your pick of the weapon attached to it. And it will still be a one handed weapon, so no finessing.
You somehow manage to get a ranger/barbarian gestalt getting all feats and rage and pounce and totems into 10 levels. Then stack on a spell not on the ranger list, more bonus feats...none of which is in the core rules, so you're really, really trying to abuse corner case examples here.
I don't have to prove I'm right in this event. You have to prove you are. The core rules are quite clear in that weapon and armor enhancements are priced separately, they have two whole separate tables, and they don't stack. You are trying to make them stack.
And 'interpolation' is 'reading into' stuff, which you're doing. Extrapolating is 'taking this rule and expanding it to others', which you're NOT doing, or you'd realize armor spikes are precedence and extrapolate that ruling to shields and your argument would fall apart before it began. So stay away from the lectures on proper use of English, okay?
The whole stricture of your argument is revolving around your interpretation of English. As soon as it was done that way, it started to fall apart.
And, sorry, it's not the way 'I and several others' have done this. It's the way it's been done for ten+ years, and nobody has done differently. If you want to go back to 3.5, go take a look in the Book of Exalted Deeds, the Asura's Shield. +1 bashing/+1 flaming shield. Guess how it's priced? Not as a +4 shield. Completely separately. And if you want to sunder it, it's +1. Nothing stacks.
The rules are quite clear. You can add weapon enhancements to any item that qualifies as a weapon. Spiked armor qualifies. It has no effect on the limits of armor enhancement, and yet adding spikes makes them part of the armor.
Shields work the same way, except that shields default to being usable as a weapon, albeit a poor one, they don't have to be modified as one. You don't have to add spikes.
You're not going to ever see a 300k shield in print. 1) it's too much money for an NPC 2) It's too much money for a PC 3) it's the same reason you don't see a +10/+10 double weapon, dual wielder, or spiked suit of armor. It's twice too much money.
So, you can try to keep posting the same thing, man, but nobody's believing it. The rules are what they are, and you're trying to wedge in this corner case exception which falls down as soon as you look at precedence and common sense.
Enjoy your dual klar wielder. just don't distort the rules to make him more effective then he is...and after a while you'll probably realize why you don't see such builds often.
==Aelryinth
So either I use it as a Light Spiked Shield for D4 damage and Finesse with it, or use it as a One-handed Weapon for D6 damage, but no Finesse or Agile; as evidenced by the Thunder and Fang feat description, very well, you proved me wrong here. I also forgot that I probably wouldn't be able to cast spells with the Klars either, whereas with Quickdraw Darkwood Light Shields and the Quick Draw feat, I could.
You aren't reading what I typed correctly once again. I said I take the Infiltrator Witchguard Ranger archetypes for the first 10 levels; at 10th level, thanks to Witchguard Patron spells, I can get access to the Silence and Haste spells from the Time patron, since they will be put on my spell list to prepare for the day. The Infiltrator Archetype allows me to select adaptations from my Favored Enemies, 1 at 3rd level (Iron Will from Undead Favored Enemy), and then 2 more at 8th level, which are usable 10 minutes per day per Ranger level.
So I take that for 10 character levels. Once I hit 11th level, I then take Invulernable Urban Barbarian archetypes for the remaining 10 character levels, getting the Beast Totem line, and a couple other goodies. By level 20, I'll have the ability to Pounce to serve as my capstone, plus 3rd level casting (although I really only use it for the Haste), and the ability to make 8 attacks with TWF with no penalties, and deal competent damage while maintaining a strong defense. You with me so far now, or am I still tripping you up?
I assume this is the item in question? Doesn't call itself a +1 Bashing/+1 Flaming shield like you say it does. It says it's a +2 Bashing Heavy Spiked Shield, so you're wrong on at least two accounts, that the modifiers for the propertes calculated separately, and the actual Enhancement bonus amount. It then says it deals 1D6 Fire damage and 1D6 Divine damage. It also costs ~27,000 gold. If we did it the way of +1 Bashing and +1 Flaming combined like you said it was, that number makes absolutely zero sense, since +1 Bashing equates to 4K, and +1 Flaming equates to 8K, there's 15K that unaccounted for.
So let's try it my way: A +2 (AC) Bashing shield costs 9K to enchant. We have a mimicked Flaming property, so 2K for that. It also has a 1D6 versus Evil creatures; the closest property that symbolizes that is the Holy property, a +2 bonus, so that bumps it from 2K to 18K. Combining the 2 different numbers according to what the Shield section says (9K + 18K = 27K), that total equates to the price being listed, and it functions as an effective +6 Shield, having +2 in Enhancement Bonuses to AC, +1 in Shield Special Abilities, and +3 in Weapon Special Abilities.
Trying it another way, we can have a +2 AC Bashing shield with a +2 Hit Flaming (it explains how it says the regular bash damage is 2D6+2, which, with the above example, makes that line of text incorrect via calculation), making it the same cost, though the 1D6 V.S. Evil price isn't factored in, which, if it was, would make the shield cost a lot more.
That being said, Specific Items with effects not symbolized in the special abilities chart aren't an accurate means to determine whether an item is calculated with separate or combined modifiers, since the Asura Shield in question doesn't actually refer to the Flaming and Holy properties, even if the effects are practically identical. (Ironically enough, using the properties themselves would actually be stronger than the specific item in question.) In this case, we also don't know how much bonuses the uncalculated effects are worth, if we decide to enhance this same exact weapon in the future.
My argument of Armor Spikes V.S. Shield Spikes is the same argument that was presented in whether Haste allows Monks to make an extra attack with their FoB or other Full Attack Option if they didn't use a Monk Weapon; the Haste RAW mentioned "When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon." Because Monk Unarmed Strikes are considered both a Natural and Manufactured weapon for spell effects that target such, and Haste targets a creature, not a creature's natural or manufactured weapon, RAW, Monks couldn't get an extra Unarmed Strike attack with Haste.
The same concept applies to the former argument we are having; because Shield Spikes refer to enhancing "the shield" into a magic weapon in its own right, you must enhance the shield itself as a weapon, not the spikes on the shield itself, because RAW, they aren't considered an object separate from the shield for you to enhance. Armor Spikes, on the other hand refer to enhancing "the spikes" into a magic weapon in its own right, meaning you can enhance the Spikes separately from enhancing the Armor.