Fey Animal

YuriP's page

53 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Isn't better they use True Strike?


Hello everyone I have far from this forum for a time while I was reading some more books and played a little.

Now I back with some more alternative Shield Rules in more simplified and easier to apply that better the shields (specially the mundane ones) without making then too much resistance or indestructible at same time that's creates many new strategic options for the combat.

I removed the Sunder rules in trade of a simple resistance/weakness/vulnerability inspired in some elemental/vegetal monsters and itens. That's also helps to unarmed and natural attacks to exploit some shields weakness without need to rework the monsters abilities.

So follow my new homebrew rules for shield blocks:

New Alternative Shield Block Rules (3.0)

  • Shield block reaction is now moved from Step 4 (from CRB pg. 450) to a special Step 2.5 where the hardness is calculated after Step 2 (Determine The Damage Type) and before the Step 3 (Apply the Target’s Immunities, Weaknesses, and Resistances) and changes the Trigger text from "While you have your shield raised, you would take damage from a physical attack." to "While you have your shield raised, a physical attack would hit you."¹
  • The Shield Block only affects physical damages
  • Shield Block feat is no more a General feat, it's now a Class/Archtype feat that can be acquired as Archetype part of Champions feats (Feat 4) (acquirable after you take Champion Dedication)
  • The shields now has resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities based on their material, this resistances is applied to shield only, separated from you and applied after their hardness reduces the damage (at the same way the character resistances is now only applied to the char and no more to the shields too) you will receive any damage beyond the shield hardness normally:

    - The Wooden Shields (including darkwood) now have Piercing/Bludgeoning Resistance, Fire Weakness and Axe Vulnerability equals to the shield Hardness value.
    - The Metal Shields (like steel, adamantine, cold iron, mithral, silver and orichalcum) now have Piercing/Slashing Resistance, Acid Weakness and Hammer Vulnerability equals to the shield Hardness value.
    - The Dragonhide Shields depends of the base shield material. If it's build over a wooden shield their resistances/weakness/vulnerabilities are equal to wooden shields, if made over a steel shield is equal to the metal shields. But it's immunities can surpass the weakness .Ex.: Red Dragonhide Wooden Shield has immunity to fire instead of weakness and the Black Dragonhide Steel Shield has immunity to acid instead of weakness.⁴

    I'm also adding a new high-grade class Wooden and Steel shield based in Darkwood and Silver/Mithral high grade versions. This shields costs x20 more than standard-grade ones (just like happens with the Darkwood and Mithral high-grade costs 20x more than their standard versions). This new shields help to fill the lack between the normal and sturdy shields and helps druids with stronger wooden shields:

    New High-Grade Shields:

  • Standard-Grade Wooden Shield⁵: Hardness 5, HP 20, and BT 10 - 2gp [Level 1]
  • High-Grade Buckler: Hardness 6, HP 24, and BT 12 - 40 gp [Level 2]
  • High-Grade Wooden Shield: Hardness 8, HP 32, and BT 16 - 40 gp [Level 2]
  • High-Grade Steel Shield: Hardness 8, HP 32, and BT 16 - 40 gp [Level 2]
  • High-Grade Tower Shield: Hardness 8, HP 32, and BT 16 - 200 gp [Level 2]

    I also made some balances for some Specific Shield that is strangely weaker than their typical high-grade counter parts, making then a little more resistant a standardizing them based on their size:

    Specific Shields balances:

  • ARROW-CATCHING SHIELD: This shield has same resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities of any Wooden Shield and now has Hardness 8 HP 32, and BT 16.
  • DRAGONSLAYER’S SHIELD: This shield has same resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities of any Metal Shield plus the dragonhide type resistance. But if it's made with an Acid resistance dragonhide this shield will have only 5 of Acid Resistance.
  • FLOATING SHIELD: The Bucklers are typically made from steel (CRB Pg. 277) as the book doesn't specifies for this shield I understand this is the same case for this shield. So this shield has same resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities of any Metal Shield.
  • FORCE SHIELD: This shield has same resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities of any Metal Shield. The bubble of force also protects the shield too when active (add resistance 5 to physical damage)
  • FORGE WARDEN: This shield has same resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities of any Metal Shield and now has Hardness 8 HP 32, and BT 16. The shield has fire resistance 5 too.
  • LION’S SHIELD: This shield has same resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities of any Metal Shield and now has Hardness 8 HP 32, and BT 16.
  • REFLECTING SHIELD: This shield has same resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities of any Metal Shield
  • SPELLGUARD SHIELD: This shield has same resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities of any Metal Shield and now has Hardness 8 HP 32, and BT 16.
  • SPINED SHIELD: This shield has same resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities of any Metal Shield and now has Hardness 8 HP 32, and BT 16. The Spines keeps absolving 6 damage.
  • STURDY SHIELD: The Sturdy Shields have its resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities values locked in 8. Because their magical abjuration sturdiness does not increase their material resistances.⁶

    To avoid fighters/champ's only block ability, I changed the Shield cantrip too to become more useful to block and make the use of this Cantrip more strategic:

    Alternative Shield Cantrip Block Rules:

  • Shield cantrip now are 2 actions (Verbal,Somatic) but if not destroyed it can be sustained with 1 action using the default Sustain a Spell rules.
  • If you Block with Shield Cantrip it's destroyed but you can cast it again (no more 10min interval).
  • If used to block Magic Missiles, just block 1 missile and +1 additional for each Heightened (3rd,5th,7th,9th).

    I also made change in Mending because the default Mending magic is completely unbalanced and is useless:

    Alternative Mending Spell Rules:

  • It's now are 1 action (Somatic) or 2 actions (Verbal,Somatic) spell.
  • [1 action] touch range
  • [2 actions] 30ft range.
  • The Mending Spell can now repair magic itens too.
  • The Mending Spell is now Heightened (+1) the reparable object Bulk increases +1 and restore Hit Points increases +5

    Obs.:
    ¹ The main reason to change the steps is to solve the weirdness to know the damage value before choose to block (now the choice can be based in weapon and damage type) that is considered by many people including myself as a metagame (imagine a char that is constantly calculating how strong is the attack coming before choose if it will react to it) and the cases where the the char immunities/resistences/weakness from Step 3 is automagically added to the Shield just because you are just wield it. So there's no more know damage before block and no more auto-shared resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities with the shield.
    ² It's just to clarify that a normal Shield Block reaction to only blocks the physical damage, the exceptions is where the char has the ability to shield block some special case like cleric EMBLAZON ENERGY feat.
    ³ Once that the Shield Block is little stronger now, this helps to balance the feat. It's also help to prevent a strange number of players with shielded light casters like mages/sorcerers using shields to block at low levels!
    ⁴ This create a new interesting use to Dragonhide Shields when using in conjunction with an ability like Emblazon Energy.
    ⁵ The Wooden Shield from CRB (Pg. 277) is weaken than their counter-parts in Crafting & Treasure (P.g 587) working like a cheaper low-grade version. Probably this was made in order to avoid it become equal to it's steel counter part in Equipament chapter. As with these rules they have a diference between resistance/weakness/vulnerabilities they now have a clear diference and I add this standard version here too.
    ⁶ I put a limit in Sturdy Shields to avoid it's become too much resistance with new rules. This also helps to give more utility for the Adamantine shields


  • Thank you.

    I didn't found because I was searching for Legendary Perception


    Ascalaphus wrote:
    YuriP wrote:

    Yep, makes sense because as the perception is no more a skill, so everyone in a party have it. Now basically what make's diference between chars perception is their class abilities (all martial and specialist classes, except for the monk and champion, have high grade in perception and the ranger is the only one can achieve legendary perception) and some ancestries feats that allow to bonus perception checks in some circumstances.

    But there's still some situations where simply without takes 20 allow they have success when there's no possible. For example if there's a very well hidden stone door with CD 34 that hidden rare valuable treasures, a LVL 7 party usually as never able to find it, but if this same party have a dwarf/elf fighter/thief/ranger with Ageless Patience or Stonecunning they will able to find it. they will able to find it. If we simple auto find ignoring this little diferences between chars abilities we will ignore the players effort building their chars.

    First off, where are you getting DC 34 from? Since it's not a nice round number from the simple DCs table, is it coming from the level-based DCs table? Because for a level 7 party that's still higher than typical for a level 7 challenge with "incredibly hard (+10 DC) adjustment". So I'm guessing this is just some random number that you plucked out of the air?

    But it's actually entirely doable for the party to find it. Let's say they have a cleric using Search tactics. A level 7 cleric has Expert perception, about 18-19 Wisdom, so a 7+4+4= +15 Perception, meaning he needs to roll a 14 to find it.

    A level 7 Ranger has Master perception, and Wisdom of 14 doesn't seem to be unreasonable for a ranger either since it boosts Nature and Survival, stuff rangers like to be good at. He also has a +15 Perception. Since he's good at it, he's also going to be Searching.

    So then the odds of neither of those guys making the check is (14/20)*(14/20)=0.49; in other words, there's a 51% chance that at least one...

    Was just an example, I'm just trying to say that depending of the party and circumstances auto-success are not good applicable and take a 20 helps to know if is possible or not.

    Mr. Pedantic wrote:
    YuriP wrote:
    (all martial and specialist classes, except for the monk and champion, have high grade in perception and the ranger is the only one can achieve legendary perception)
    Rogues also receive Legendary Perception. As will Investigator based on the Class Playtest (and that specifically seems unlikely to change).

    Really!? I didn't found Legendary Perception in my book or in SRD:

    https://pf2.d20pfsrd.com/class/rogue/


    Ascalaphus wrote:

    The paragraph preceding that one in the GMG is also quite relevant:

    Spoiler:
    GMG p. 18 wrote:

    MORE ON SEARCHING

    The rules for Searching deliberately avoid giving intricate
    detail on how long a search takes. That’s left in your hands
    because the circumstances of a search can vary widely.
    If the group isn’t in any danger and has time for a really
    thorough search, that’s a good time to allow them to
    automatically succeed, rather than bothering to roll, or
    you might have them roll to see how long it takes before
    they find what they’re looking for, ultimately finding it
    eventually no matter the result. Conversely, if they stop
    for a thorough search in the middle of a dungeon, that’s
    a good time for their efforts to draw unwanted attention!

    I think this fits within the general philosophy at work in PF2 that replaces the Take 20 uses of PF1: if you can and will keep trying something until it works, then just let the PCs succeed without a roll.

    If the amount of time it takes is "interesting" then a roll can be used to determine how long it takes to succeed.

    Yep, makes sense because as the perception is no more a skill, so everyone in a party have it. Now basically what make's diference between chars perception is their class abilities (all martial and specialist classes, except for the monk and champion, have high grade in perception and the ranger is the only one can achieve legendary perception) and some ancestries feats that allow to bonus perception checks in some circumstances.

    But there's still some situations where simply without takes 20 allow they have success when there's no possible. For example if there's a very well hidden stone door with CD 34 that hidden rare valuable treasures, a LVL 7 party usually as never able to find it, but if this same party have a dwarf/elf fighter/thief/ranger with Ageless Patience or Stonecunning they will able to find it. If we simple auto find ignoring this little diferences between chars abilities we will ignore the players effort building their chars.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    This probably is the Brazilian version of the book.

    The pg. 620 have the condition "ferido" that's can be easily direct translated to injured but this page is talking about wounded condition.

    But backing to Medicine checks, you can do booth things with the skill, you can recover HP and recover from wounded condition.


    I will probably be cursed with this answer but maybe your party just needs a magical healer.

    I agree the Medicine checks are complicated and have drawbacks but at least the heal skill "exists".

    I older versions (PF1 and D&D 3/3.5) books there's almost no way to be fast healed than magic. The old heal skill only heals 1HP por lvl per day, basically only working for threat wound that can keep you dying. In this version medicine now is projected to allow non-magical heals to have some efficiency without totally depend from magical heals, but many drawbacks like fail chances and time was imposed to avoid this heal ability surpasses the magic heals and avoid make then useless.

    That's probably the why medicine don't receive alternative faster and simple rules for free (you still can buy some medicine feats to better it but it's not "free" once you wast a skill feat to do it).


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    I usually don't allow re-checks during a dungeon exploration not only to avoid the player "just roll perception until the dice give's them a 20" (what is a metagame) but also to represent the tension behind staying too long in a dangerous place.
    The most chars know how dangerous is stay in a unknown dark hostile place where something can hurt you from nowhere, this make they have little patience to stay too long searching for every detail.
    They can choose to do active and more detailed searches in order to find secrets, traps or even creatures hiding or they can just rush the room to avoid being surrounded or just because they know that is not too smart to stay longer in most dangerous places. But if some player insists to try to recheck I normally ask they to do a will check against a incremental CD (normally starting with 10 and increasing by 5) and at every fail I add a +1 stupefied (+2 if crit fail) for 1 min, after +3 I just say that someone lost the patience and there's no more success chance. This usually is enough to avoid abuses and helps they to understand better the situation where theirs chars are.

    Another thing that make's me think that is no good to allow then to freely do re-checks is the Elfs Ageless Patience Feat:

    Ageless Patience Feat wrote:

    You work at a pace born from longevity that enhances your thoroughness. You can voluntarily spend twice as much time as normal on a Perception check or skill check to gain a +2 circumstance bonus to that check. You also don’t treat a natural 1 as worse than usual on these checks; you get a 40 critical failure only if your result is 10 lower than the DC. For example, you could get these benefits if you spent 2 actions to Seek, which normally takes 1 action. You can get these benefits during exploration by taking twice as long exploring as normal, or in downtime by spending twice as much downtime.

    The GM might determine a situation doesn’t grant you a benefit if a delay would be directly counterproductive to your success, such as a tense negotiation with an impatient creature.

    This Feat make's me to interpret that is not in game design to repeat perception tests based in how much time a char stay searching. The CRB prefers to allow a char to take more time searching and gives a bonus for this instead if he/she have enough patience for this. There's also other examples and instructions in Game Mastering ch. saying to reuse the results for repeated tests instead of re-roll.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    SuperBidi wrote:

    Synaptic Pulse comes from PF1 and Starfinder and are both affecting all creatures in the area (including the caster, which is the only difference in PF2).

    So, I think RAW is also RAI.

    Use the PF1 and SF is not good reference to know how the spell work once that many spells was changed in 2e.

    Also, the text for such magics in older books call explicitly "all creatures", just 2e calls enemies. There's other area effect magics 2e that explicitly says creatures instead of enemies when they want to effect all. But the "Each creature in the area must attempt a Will save" is a common sentence used also in other spells just to say what save to use and not what creatures are effected, just like the Porridge example.

    SF Synaptic Pulse wrote:
    You stun all creatures in range for 1 round.
    PF1 Synaptic Pulse wrote:
    You emit a pulsating mental blast that stuns all creatures in range of your psychic shriek for 1d4 rounds. On a successful save, a creature is instead sickened for 1 round.
    PF2 Synaptic Pulse wrote:
    You emit a pulsating mental blast that penetrates the minds of all enemies in the area. Each creature in the area must attempt a Will save.

    I don't think this is a fluffy.


    The secret rolls are negotiated with you and your players. The CRB just suggest it:

    "CRB Pg. 234 wrote:
    This rule is the default for actions with the secret trait, but the GM can choose not to use secret checks if they would rather some or all rolls be public.

    Besides that usually you don't need to do secret checks for your players in most perception checks. Just most active hazards like creatures hiding is where I'm usually do secret checks. (depending from who have the initiative, if monsters notice the players before they can roll Stealth actively vs players perception DC, if not the aren't hiding at all and no secret test is needed) For the passive things like traps they are always hided by default. So to the player need to do the test actively to search them. (but this can change if someone has some passive feat to detect things).

    In a case of the players have to use secret passive perception, if a creature tries to hide from them, but don't try to use it initiative advantage against the players and choose to wait, it's fair to allow players to actively do checks in their turn to find even if they don't notice it from the beginning. Because was a choice of this creature to wait, so this increses the risky to be found.


    Redblade8 wrote:
    I... did not say the thing YuriP has quoted me about. /curious

    Sorry, as the forum only auto-quote one person, I copied the wrong nick without notice.


    Why are we discussing this!?

    Claxon wrote:
    You're not Solid Snake and this isn't Metal Gear. You can't just hide under a box and expect enemies to ignore you.

    Good moments


    graystone wrote:
    It's shiny and expensive! Just the kind of thing a rich noble would LOVE! "Adamantine armor has a shiny, black appearance and is amazingly durable."

    And is black too. Maybe good to very rich noble act as a black knight! 😂

    Zalerian wrote:
    Agreed. Armor material is pretty well moot except mithril is lighter and orichalum can have another enchant. There are more beasties than I realized that had armor damaging attacks though (half dozen or so). It is still a huge chunk of your wealth tied up in little actual value.

    Even mithril is far away from being viable for an armor. It's just reduce the volume a little (1 point), there's no more armor class reduction like old version (what's good in my opinion, the armor reduction from old games give an enormous advantages with classes that has armor restricted abilities). And the orichalcum is a rare, lvl 20 stupidly expensive armor that just allow you to put one more rune and +1 for initiative. You probably don't earn such armor, in a game, and even if you earn one, you probably has a better use for the money.

    The only special materials good enough is dragonhide armors that can allow druids to use much better armors than those they usually can use.

    Redblade8 wrote:
    My first thought was to let people who wear adamantine armor use the 'Shield Block' reaction with their armor, but I wasn't sure if that would favor two handed warriors too much.

    Oh can imagine it:

    - GM: You receive damage, what would you do?
    - Player: I will open my arms and and try to block with my brilliant black admantium chest! 🤣


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Draco18s wrote:
    Pumpkinhead11 wrote:

    Though let’s assume we can only use Common Materials like Cold Iron and see what we can do with a Forge Warden.

    Standard-Grade Cold Iron Forge Warden
    7H 28HP 14BP

    Pretty basic and lackluster, but we have Feats and Features that can boost it; Divine Ally, Everstand Stance, Emblazon Armament; to where it now looks like this:

    Standard-Grade Cold Iron Forge Warden
    12H 42HP 21BP

    Ok, so, (1) cold iron is a worse material than steel (sure, you bumped up to "standard grade" but we don't have "standard grade steel" to compare with), so why bother and (2) adding Divine Ally, Everstand Stance, and Emblazon Armament to it to show it being useful is a red herring: we can add those feats to the regular version anyway and (3) not everyone is a Paladin.

    And oh yeah, (4) how the **** did you even arrive at those stats? 7 hardness? Forge Warden has +1 hardness and +4 HP compared to a steel shield, yet you seem to have completely disregarded that modifier.

    I never understand why there's no high grade stell or wood shields?

    All other materials have it, even Silver and Dark Wood has a high grade. Why there's no single steel/wood high grade shields?


    But using the same principle, as well as not knowing the damage is a bad option because the high risk of damage in such fragile shields makes shield blocking unfeasible. Knowing the damage also does not mean that it is a good solution to the problem! And in the end this creates a whole new series of new problems strangeness.

    That's the why we complain, just "to know" still keeps the non-sturdy shields too fragile, much more hardly to repair then heal wounds, more limited in feats than other off-hand and two-hand equipments, artificially creates a need of a very specific class of expensive magical/material shields options if you want keep your blocking ability useful, and also create a strangeness where the players have a fully and exactly control of how and where their shield broken (if they even decide to break it) or how much damage those shield will take, not even the attacker can control the damage like this.


    Ascalaphus wrote:
    As for repairing: there is nothing that says you need Magical Crafting to repair magic items. The "Repair" activity of Crafting doesn't say so; the Magical Crafting feat doesn't say so; and the Crafting section of the Crafting & Treasure chapter doesn't say so. So there is no evidence that you need that feat to repair stuff.

    But this still don't make much sense. Is like allow anyone with Craft able to repair anything no matter how complex is the magic or alchemic was imbued in it.

    Is just like ask a metalworker to do repairs in a car that no longer rides.

    Zapp wrote:
    I don't think anyone has complained about the concept of having to lug around a reserve shield to use while your main shield is broken.

    I complained about this.

    Change shields don't allow you to have a backpack and is not practical and is dangerous to do during combat. Takes much time and risk you to receive an opportunity attack.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Zapp wrote:
    Timeshadow wrote:
    This is very interesting. It lets you know right up front that in most cases you are not gonna save money crafting an item over buying it unless you take a ton of downtime unless it's something you can't get any other way.

    The ONLY way Crafting is going to save you money, once you fully understand the RAW, is

    1) if the party is stuck in a backwater town, meaning the settlement level is lower than your own level, meaning that the tasks available for Earn Income are significantly lower in level. As a crafter, you can Craft at your own level, not the settlement's level.
    2) you have considerable downtime available (and again, no way of simply travelling to a metropolis that can cater to heroes of your level)

    and even then
    3) you don't actually make any money. All you can do is earn more money relative to your friends in the party. That is, all savings depend on you earning money appropriate for your level while your friends have to spend time on low-level tasks, earning less money.

    That is, any money made on Crafting relies on the misfortune of your fellow party members. (If that sounds harsh, you just haven't fully absorbed the RAW effects of the official rules. Yes, I mean that's literally how the rules work!)

    But I never think the Craft as a way to save money. Is more a way to personalize what you have. (but u still have to know the formulas)


    Even with sturdy shield solution still have some heavier restrictions.

    This shields are expensive, and is usually accessible only after lvl 3 (if u earn enough money or your GM put one in your adventure treasure), so until there you have to face with your fragile shield.

    Maybe if you make a agree with rest of your party you may buy it earlier.

    "CRB pg. 509 wrote:


    TABLE 10–9: PARTY TREASURE BY LEVEL

    Level - Total Value - Permanent Items - Consumables - Party Currency - Additional PC
    1 175 gp 2nd: 2, 1st: 2* 2nd: 2, 1st: 3 40 gp 10 gp
    2 300 gp 3rd: 2, 2nd: 2 3rd: 2, 2nd: 2, 1st: 2 70 gp 18 gp
    3 500 gp 4th: 2, 3rd: 2 4th: 2, 3rd: 2, 2nd: 2 120 gp 30 gp
    4 850 gp 5th: 2, 4th: 2 5th: 2, 4th: 2, 3rd: 2 200 gp 50 gp
    5 1,350 gp 6th: 2, 5th: 2 6th: 2, 5th: 2, 4th: 2 320 gp 80 gp
    6 2,000 gp 7th: 2, 6th: 2 7th: 2, 6th: 2, 5th: 2 500 gp 125 gp
    7 2,900 gp 8th: 2, 7th: 2 8th: 2, 7th: 2, 6th: 2 720 gp 180 gp
    8 4,000 gp 9th: 2, 8th: 2 9th: 2, 8th: 2, 7th: 2 1,000 gp 250 gp
    9 5,700 gp 10th: 2, 9th: 2 10th: 2, 9th: 2, 8th: 2 1,400 gp 350 gp
    10 8,000 gp 11th: 2, 10th: 2 11th: 2, 10th: 2, 9th: 2 2,000 gp 500 gp
    11 11,500 gp 12th: 2, 11th: 2 12th: 2, 11th: 2, 10th: 2 2,800 gp 700 gp
    12 16,500 gp 13th: 2, 12th: 2 13th: 2, 12th: 2, 11th: 2 4,000 gp 1,000 gp
    13 25,000 gp 14th: 2, 13th: 2 14th: 2, 13th: 2, 12th: 2 6,000 gp 1,500 gp
    14 36,500 gp 15th: 2, 14th: 2 15th: 2, 14th: 2, 13th: 2 9,000 gp 2,250 gp
    15 54,500 gp 16th: 2, 15th: 2 16th: 2, 15th: 2, 14th: 2 13,000 gp 3,250 gp
    16 82,500 gp 17th: 2, 16th: 2 17th: 2, 16th: 2, 15th: 2 20,000 gp 5,000 gp
    17 128,000 gp 18th: 2, 17th: 2 18th: 2, 17th: 2, 16th: 2 30,000 gp 7,500 gp
    18 208,000 gp 19th: 2, 18th: 2 19th: 2, 18th: 2, 17th: 2 48,000 gp 12,000 gp
    19 355,000 gp 20th: 2, 19th: 2 20th: 2, 19th: 2, 18th: 2 80,000 gp 20,000 gp
    20 490,000 gp 20th: 4 20th: 4, 19th: 2 140,000 gp 35,000 gp
    * Many 1st-level permanent items should be items from Chapter 6 instead of magic items.

    "CRB pg. 588 wrote:

    Type minor; Level 4; Price 100 gp

    The shield has Hardness 8, HP 64, and BT 32.

    This also remember a thing, the Sturdy Shields are great to block but and for repairs?

    Even a minor Sturdy Shield is a magical abjuration shield that make the steel shield to have a great BT, but I don't remember none rule talking about repair a magical item, so there's no need to have Magical Crafting feat (page 263) to do the repairs?

    This is based on the concept behind "if there's a doubt of a thing being to good to be true, probably not work that way" so a magic item is also only repairable with Magical Crafting feat?

    And also will take a good time to completely repair it (but for a stronger shield this probably isn't a problem and you can easily wait to arrive in a safe place to full repair it).


    I said that the blocks works like a workaround.

    Because it not only compromises for such unatural order to do the things. If the Shield Block was an isolated feat without other feats of at last 2 classes and some itens depending of how it's works, there would be not a great problem with it. But when we starts to connect weak shields with this strange way to calc block with feats that increases the block needs like fighters AGGRESSIVE BLOCK [FREE-ACTION], POWERFUL SHOVE, REFLEXIVE SHIELD, SHIELD WARDEN, QUICK SHIELD BLOCK, FLINGING SHOVE, IMPROVED REFLEXIVE SHIELD, or champion SHIELD WARDEN, QUICK BLOCK, SHIELD OF RECKONING [REACTION], SHIELD OF GRACE with the fact of many of high-level special/magic shields don't also has a great BT and in join with the fact that shields repair take many time to do, makes the entire reaction increasingly more unbalanced.

    You see this easily when you compare the shoves feats, that works with both two handed weapons (Brutish Shove) and shields (Agressive Shield), you will notice when you are doing the Shove with a two handed weapon you can do this many times as you want in same encounter, while when doing with the shield, you are not only limited to the fact that you can only do this while blocking (whats expected) but you also has to consider that puting shove feats based in shield block you are limited in how many times you can do this in a combat depending of how weak your shield is. Becouse if your shield brokes you can't do anymore, if you don't block to avoid the shield broken you can't even starts the shove condition.

    So you spend the same feats number to do the same thing, but when doing with a shield you way more limite than with a two handed weapon. And this is only 1 example, there are so many other cases of strange unbalances and weirdness with shield block in this entire topic that shows that the block reaction is poorly maded.


    Lycar wrote:
    YuriP wrote:
    In the end know the damage before apply it doesn't make that much difference (sic).
    If it doesn't matter, then why go against the designers' intent and penalize players for no good reason?

    You can choose many reasons, between them:

  • To allow the shields broken independently from only the player's will, giving more tension and less control in how much damage they take from an opponent attack.
  • To give little more realism not exactly knowing when the shield will broken and make them create tactical choices with some risks, not only to do the obvious movement to block until the limit of the shield BT then stop to block any more than hardness to avoid the broken. Know the damage before is not a tactical choice is only a temp HP with hardness.

    But as I said, from me I'm now clarified to know the damage don't make that much difference in face of the fact that shield block are useless even against many of even low level opponents. Ex.:

    See the case of a fighter with Str 18 and a rapier that some times uses a Power Attack:

  • It can broke any buckler with a single action hit, because the damage is between 4-9 (1d6 +4), so will vary between heavily damage the shield, broken or completely destroy it with a weapon that supposedly is more slim and fragile than a shield.
  • Can also broke wooden shields in a single action attack, with little more difficult, but with 33% of chance (just need to roll 5/6 with d6), is also possible even to destroy a wood shield with with use of the power attack once this can do more than double and a rapier can even completely destroy the shield beyond repairs.
  • For steel and tower shields the thing become little more difficult, my fighter with a rapier example now need to use a power attack to have a chance to broke the shield in a single blow. But it still can, and if we change it's weapon for a some heavy one like a greataxe to not use power attack to broke, but if it chose to use he can also completely destroy the shield with just one greataxe blow.

    So thinking like this is easily to understand that's why was made such workaround like solution to know the damage before block. It's a try to diminish the problem of the weak shields easlily putting such ugly solution instead of try to re-calc everything.

    If the Shield wasn't so weak know the damage would be even less important and some chars could study the enemys while block.

    Ironically I was recently search some videos to know how resistant is a wood shield and notice that probably the Samurai's. solution was that one more closest to the reality than I was thought ..


  • The-Magic-Sword wrote:
    YuriP wrote:
    The-Magic-Sword wrote:
    The fiction checks out, it's basically people who have a strong enough force of personality to twist fate around them when they're really determined.
    The second part is more in line with what I'm worried about, do you think that having an extra hero point or two (half charisma mod) would be imbalancing? I think the full mod might be too much. It's definitely a boost, but since Charisma is a little weak anyway, I assume that carries through.

    The Cha is not thats weak too. Even don't heaving a save like Con, Wis, Dex, it still the main ability of all spontaneous casters used also to do mostly magic attack rolls and also the main ability of all social skills except from society and the secondary stat for clerics and champions and is the base stat for non-casters class CD.

    Comparatively to Str for example it's way more useful stat, once the Str is now basically used for melee non-finesse attack rolls and melee/throw damage (and partially for some bows). But don't make much sense use str bonus for Fate points.

    For me, still better to allow all classes to have access to it equally, receiving 1 fate point per day freely and with possibility to increment it as a general feat.


    The Gleeful Grognard wrote:


    One of the great things about how domains work is how they grant those focus spells imo, so if it doesn't suit your character then other options are usually more appealing imo.

    Yep, this can be very useful for multi-classing with other classes that has good focus feats.


    corwyn42 wrote:

    Getting the 5 damage reduction from a normal steel shield block helps, but the risk to your shield (especially from a critically successful strike) goes up significantly. The normal steel shield probably breaks after a couple of blocks. For these levels, if you do not want your shield destroyed, knowing the damage before deciding to block is important.

    If you have invested a significant amount of gold in a specific shield, it is even more important - especially since most specific shields do not provide a level appropriate increase in hardness (yes, sturdy shields are best mostly due to the increase in...

    That's the point that I'm talking about.

    In the end know the damage before apply it doesn't make that much diference. If the player knows the attack roll of a monster the player can easily calc the damage range of that monster and calc if worth to block it or try other tactics. The only mainly diference, is that if the players know the damage before they can security choose when their shield will broke, if they don't know they need to analyze the risks before try, but is not like they done this blindly.


    Aratorin wrote:
    YuriP wrote:
    You cannot avoid any effect with block except lose HP.
    If whatever is attacking you has an effect that does additional stuff when it damages you, if your shield reduces all of the damage, the other stuff doesn't happen either.

    You can't reduce the damage to less than 1, see the errata:

    CRB Errata wrote:

    CHAPTER 9: PLAYING THE GAME

    Page 451: Following the formulas for calculating damage rolls, add the sentence “If the combined penalties on an attack would reduce the damage to 0 or below, you still deal 1 damage.”

    Once that the Hardness doesn't count as Resistance, it's probably count as item penalty (but once again the CRB don't explain well how hardness works).

    Draco18s wrote:

    Mending is incapable of repairing shields until you have access to 2nd level spells (only bucklers are Light).

    Quote:
    Targets non-magical object of light Bulk or less

    You'r right, it's worse, it can only repair shield only when used in lvl 2 spell.


    Talonhawke wrote:
    Because they haven't been blocking and healing them wasn't yet a priority and now major damage is incoming that would down them. Or a rider to an ability might be worth taking that damage to the shield and breaking it to keep the character from getting afflicted with something.

    You cannot avoid any effect with block except lose HP.

    Goldryno wrote:
    That's just not true in every situation. Yes they will choose to avoid negative consequences like having an item break when they are relatively safe or have alternatives available. But in a dire situation that is far from the worst set of circumstances that can happen (especially when character death is a possibility).

    But's still true for the mostly situations. In most cases that you have to choose to sacrifice a shield in order to not down, you still need that the diference between the damage is smaller than shield hardness, and even so, you will stay up with such low HP thar hardly make the diference during encounter and now without the shield AC.

    Usually is better to take the damage, enter in dying state, be healed by someone, even wounded, then back to fight with full AC to try avoid another damage.

    Malk_Content wrote:
    I would rather lose 2 ac and still be standing than be downed, even if I can be healed after. The shield can likely be healed as well. This is ignoring of course that for the cost of 2gp and a one action cost I can be back at optimal ac even if my super nice shield is broken.

    Is ironically much more more harder to heal the shield than a char!

    A shield HP can only be restored after 10min repairing it, no mater if using craft or magic (and the spell to do this and usually heal much less than any heal magic). Such action is not possible during encounter. But the heal a char can be done even with just 1 action.

    Zapp wrote:
    Preventing 1 point of damage is way more useful than healing 1 point of damage all by itself.

    Not exactly!

    PF2e is a RPG that is much more hard to die than any other I already played because the multiple dying levels that are almost independent from how much damage do you take (except that damage is higher than your entire HP, but in such case you probably can't prevent damage too).
    This was created to avoid players death very easily (especially by unexpected very high damage rolls), and with high heals (even lvl1 divine / primal heal, can heavily heal a char or a group, especially at low levels) also make the players exploit it.

    With so much high heal the players can easily trade some damage prevention for heal. That's the usually case with shield block.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Malk_Content wrote:
    YuriP wrote:
    Lycar wrote:
    Ascalaphus wrote:

    So to collect a few things -

    Shield Block works fairly well if you know the damage before deciding whether to block. That at least lets you decide whether you want to block a blow that would break or destroy the shield. Circumstantial evidence points to this being the designer intent.

    It may offend some peoples' sense of plausibility, but I think we've also been able to swallow other practical implausibilities. For example, a barbarian with 1 HP left hits just as hard as one that's still got 100. The 1HP one isn't collapsing from the pain or anything. Playing a "death spiral" wounding system wouldn't really be fun in Pathfinder, so we sacrifice some realism for a game that runs better.

    Thank you! This should really answer the original question of this thread.

    Also, nice summary.

    That is, the shields will never break (except in cases of extreme extremity), they will only be useless to block when opponents start to appear that cause a minimum damage equal to hardness.
    nope shields will break. They just wont be destroyed

    I think you don't understand the irony behind.

    None player will choose to broke the shield if they know the damage. Why someone will do this and loose the shield AC if they know that all attacks will broke the shield? It's much easier to heal themselves than repair a broken shield, specially during an encounter.


    graystone wrote:
    Rysky wrote:
    The familiar ability is literally “it understands and speaks a language you know”, it doesn’t copy a few phrases and sounds, it can communicate and have full conversations with others.
    You can LITERALLY speak with animals and that doesn't make them sapient. Kinspeech allows your familiar to understand and speak with animals of the same species: does that make all animals sapient. Speech by itself isn't a determiner of sapience. Alexa on my tablet "understands and speaks a language" but that doesn't make it sapient: why would it be different with magic 'technology'?

    The main problem is the completely lack of information provided by 2e in familiar rules. We even don't know their main stats to know some thing like how intelligent the Familiar is.

    CRB Pg. 217 wrote:

    Familiars

    Familiars are mystically bonded creatures tied to your magic. Most familiars were originally animals, though the ritual of becoming a familiar makes them something more. You can choose a Tiny animal you want as your familiar, such as a bat, cat, raven, or snake. Some familiars are different, usually described in the ability that granted you a familiar; for example, a druid’s leshy familiar is a Tiny plant instead of an animal, formed from a minor nature spirit.
    Familiars have the minion trait (page 634), so during an encounter, they gain 2 actions in a round if you spend an action to command them. If your familiar dies, you can spend a week of downtime to replace it at no cost. You can have only one familiar at a time.
    Modifiers and AC
    Your familiar’s save modifiers and AC are equal to yours before applying circumstance or status bonuses or penalties. Its Perception, Acrobatics, and Stealth modifiers are equal to your level plus your spellcasting ability modifier (Charisma if you don’t have one, unless otherwise specified). If it attempts an attack roll or other skill check, it uses your level as its modifier. It doesn’t have or use its own ability modifiers and can never benefit from item bonuses.

    So basically familiars are magic/alchemical created/modified creature that don't have their natural traces anymore (the main example is Leshys) that acts like a magic extension from their masters that uses the magical abilities from it.

    But... Some lines after...

    CRB Pg. 218 wrote:

    Familiar and Master Abilities

    Each day, you channel your magic into two abilities, which can be either familiar or master abilities. If your familiar is an animal that naturally has one of these abilities (for instance, an owl has a fly Speed), you must select that ability. Your familiar can’t be an animal that naturally has more familiar abilities than your daily maximum familiar abilities.

    So now the familiar abilities matter...

    This create a many problems to know the real familiar capacities. We don't know how well they speak because we don't know their main Int, this also can create problems for other things that need more info than saves/ac/hp to work against familiar and so on.

    For me this is other thing the needs an errata (to be honest I think we need a entire new explanation of how these familiars works not just a little errata) to at least create some base stats to know how familiar works. Until there do as you wish, if the GMs believes that the familiar has a similar intelligence of his master or if they are based on master cast atribute just do it and allow it to speak normally if they received such ability that day, if not if the GM believes that familiar has more limited animal like abilities, just don't allow it to speak properly.

    Personally I like the idea of a familiar can be used for other exploration purposes (and I ignore the minion limitations during exploration for sake of a good gameplay) but seeing the poorly explanation of how they works makes me think if not better just disallow players to have familiars but I know that doing so this will break some of main capacities of many classes. So it's better to create some house rules like saying that familiars use their master stats or cast stat ability, whats worst, to calc their abilities and just allow they work like a familiar on their masters want.


    The-Magic-Sword wrote:
    The fiction checks out, it's basically people who have a strong enough force of personality to twist fate around them when they're really determined.

    Thinking more about this, so make more sense do this using Wis instead. Once this attrib is the base of Will power.

    Krugus wrote:
    If based on Charisma Modifier then your Sorcerers, Bards and Scoundrel Rogues would get a huge boost vs everyone else. They would have +4 vs some classes having +0 at first level.

    Yep have this situation too. Giving points based on an attrib modifier give advantages for some classes over others. This can make an unfair benefit.


    There's no considerations in my opinion if the uses still working like hero points.

    If you give points based o Cha bonus, the char will just earn some more dice re-rolls. It's not like they your chars become really stronger, they just will work as if your player have a better luck.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Lycar wrote:
    Ascalaphus wrote:

    So to collect a few things -

    Shield Block works fairly well if you know the damage before deciding whether to block. That at least lets you decide whether you want to block a blow that would break or destroy the shield. Circumstantial evidence points to this being the designer intent.

    It may offend some peoples' sense of plausibility, but I think we've also been able to swallow other practical implausibilities. For example, a barbarian with 1 HP left hits just as hard as one that's still got 100. The 1HP one isn't collapsing from the pain or anything. Playing a "death spiral" wounding system wouldn't really be fun in Pathfinder, so we sacrifice some realism for a game that runs better.

    Thank you! This should really answer the original question of this thread.

    Also, nice summary.

    That is, the shields will never break (except in cases of extreme extremity), they will only be useless to block when opponents start to appear that cause a minimum damage equal to hardness.


    I don't know, hero/inspiration/fate points are basically luck points (like halflings may have) but based on metagame, is a free pass to avoid some unluck rolls for the players that make most heroic acts.

    So I'm agree thats a strange point system that forces the players to do a much specific acting that is act like a hero. So normally I change it to work as reward for players that do the best performance based in their chars personalities.

    But if you want to use it as luck/fate atribute (like some games like Ragnarok Online does) the best way you can do it is like a focus magic. Recovering all 3 fate/luck points per day or per 10min refocus (for me per day make more sense).

    I don't like the idea to attach it to Cha, that would tie luck to personality, is not make much sense for me (unless if the char are a weasel 😂)


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Draco18s wrote:
    Captain Morgan wrote:
    but when you know the damage before you block you know when to switch to another shield.

    What other shield would that be?

    Quick, you're making a level 12 character and have the wealth by level listed in the book. Which permanent item slots are you spending on shields?

    And how much money you need to do this? Have 2 magical shields is lot expensive not only in bulky but in money too. And switch shields in middle of a battle takes many actions and probably make you flat-footed and can activate an enemy opportunity attack, so to switch it safely you will probably need to waste a entire turn (if you are too close from an enemy, you need to take a step away from it (1 action), release your current shield (1 free action), take the new shield from your back (1 action), rise it (1 action)) and in situations where you are flanked you probably can't avoid the attack because is impossible to avoid the flanked enemies with a single step.


    Lycar wrote:
    Getting back on topic: Until Paizo decides that they erred a bit too much on the side of caution when assigning shield harness and durability, can we agree that it is not only RAW, but also vital for a player to know the amount of damage * before * declaring a block, in order to get the most out of their class feature / feat investment?

    Now don't make much difference to know or not.

    If a player don't know the damage before block his / her can still try a knowledge check or if the foe have a weapon can do the choice based on it's weapon type or just wait the adversary to do some damage to take a idea.

    Usually the main difference to choose if block or not based on damage knowledge is about 1 turn. Ex .: If a GM don't allow know the damage before block, a player have 5 Hardness shield just need to wait to see enemy damage roll before deciding to block the other attacks. So If see the a foe rolling a 1d6 + 4 in a attack a player with such shield hardness will probably never choose to block those attacks because his / her know that the attack will probably damage the shield.

    So the main problem in this discussion is that. The mundane shield are so fragile (hardness 3 and BT 3 and 6 for bucklers and wooden shields respectively and hardness 5 BT 10 for steel shields) that even knowing the damage before don't make much difference in almost any non trivial encounter.

    That's why I tried to do a similar solution like the Perpdepog's solution in my first homebrew rules for shields but instead of increase the shield HP initialy I divided the shield damage by level, but after some discussion with Samurai and rainzax (and have noticed that I misread the shield block rule ignoring that it can only block physical damage 😝) I have noticed that do this could slow to much the encounter rolls, so I changed the my rules completely in the end.

    Now I'm separating shields damage from block reaction resurrecting the Sunder attacks as a weapon trait for heavy axes/hammers, this also creating a new interesting tactical options with shields now based on the attacker choice to sunder too and no more only in the defender choice in rise a shield (no more only in block reaction) in order to keep the shields destructible but not so fragile.

    In the end I got excited that I continued to try to solve other shields problems, like removing Shield Block from general feats and improved the Shield cantrip to avoid the "tower shielded mages" problem* and I also created a Monk Sunder feat to allow monks to sunder shields and I took the opportunity to allow monks to force itens using martial arts like a karate fighter brokes things 🤜🏻.

    *Tower Shielded Mages problem: When the players notice that the low AC casters like mage/sorcerer can just buy a tower shield and shield block feat to avoid damages creating strangely heavy shielded mages with a big +2AC shield (+4 if they use take cover) and also blocks the weak attacks just because we don't have arcane failure anymore, some time they just block even more than martial classes because even if shield broke they can still recover some shield AC with shield cantrip.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Draco18s wrote:
    Goldryno wrote:
    It does not seem to me as if the Shield itself represents some huge unnoticed flaw.

    Because it works once and then is immediately destroyed?

    But sure, it has some other features, fine. Maybe you want those instead.

    But how about Arrow Catching? Its sole function is to intercept ranged attacks that you are required to Shield Block and has the same hardness and HP, does nothing else (besides the +2 AC you can get for buying a non-magical shield, so we can't consider that to be part of its benefits, because if you want that, buy a non-magical steel shield).

    I'm not sure how "DR 6, once" is worth 900 or 1300 gp. Aren't there potions that are better and cheaper?

    In the real gameplay the players simply not do nothing of this. They will prefer to sold this shield if they win this as a treasure or they will simply never buy it, because there's many other things better.

    So if all attack are stronger than hardness, they will not loose their shields in a attack becouse they will simply not try to block as if this reaction would never exist and forget about any other feat or shield block abilities they have (probably retraining and loose it later).

    Why they will buy or keep a expensive shield that can easily broke, if they can simply change it for some thing better that doesn't have such risk?

    In the real game play, the mostly sensate players will never try to block any attack that do more damage than it's hardness to avoid shield broke and they lost their shield AC. So such shields are just useless unless you are in a extreme situation where you need to broke the shield to avoid death. (but even some players still prefer to enter in dying state and wait for a heal than lose a shield).

    For me that's the main problem of Shield Block, it's become more and more useless at high levels, so most feats that depend on it loose their effectiveness even before being really useful. Unless you invest heavily in a Sturdy Shield and forget all others magic shields (and make all your campaign fully of magic sturdy shields). And forget about do others magical shields using adamantine, this will become so expensive that mostly players and partys will never consider to buy them.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    OK, I understand your point but I think you are abstracting too much.

    Using your logic when a char receive an attack from an enemy strong (STR 18) with a rapier, at it hit but roll only 5 (1 + 4) damage and a player chose to block it with a shield with 5 Hardness and 10BT. In role play the player just like managed to block the enemy.
    But when this enemy roll max dice (8 + 4) and take 12 dmg and the player decides to no block it because this would do much damage to the shield and takes all damage. In role play now the player was unable to block!

    In practice you are giving the GM golden ability to partially rule what's happen to the game. Is like the same if the GM rolled a big damage against a player and after thinks "ok, this way I will kill this char" an decides to diminish it or attack other char instead because it doesn't like to kill that player.

    I know I'm exaggerating the example, but it's to show how this rule works and when I read "forget, this rule is cool just abstract it" for a rule that if it wasn't made officially by Paizo and instead was homebrew rule made by someone in this forum, probably such rule would be ignored, criticized and many people will throwing stones against it but no one was saying "wow, this is a cool rule, we just need to abstract it".

    To know the damage before or after block is just one of the problems with it. This rule has many others! Even knowing the damage before block, the block will become useless at high-levels as the damages increases unless you waste many gold pieces buying sturdy magical shields and basically obligating the player to use such shields and ignore all other options, there's several feats and even items that depend of this block to work, but that you receive at high levels when the blocks are already useless.

    I cannot stop think that this rule was not just poorly designed. I like to see some GMs that's trying to solve it's problems and strangness, and discussing it not just accepting it.


    For me this line separate the diference of a Class and a real Prestige subclass.

    When I say that works good like a prestige class is not like as the WotC do since the D&D 3.0, where these classes are a overpowered special multiclass. But at main conpect of the word "prestige", like a special variant of a class with little modifications.

    Ex.:
    I class like an archane archer would not good to be just a prestige/archetype class becouse such class have a unique game play style, they aren't just an archer class that learn some magic to help them fight, or a caster that uses a bow. They are a class that specializes them self in a synergetical use of their archery with magic in their own unique and different away that any other classes. So such class for me work batter as being their own class than being an archtype.

    But I class like Purple Kights works more like a specialized/regionalize fighter/champiom class that gain some special caracterists but they still fighters in essence. They gain more especialized abilites and some area lore, but they still are essencialy fighters/champions. So for me they work better being an archtype than having their own class.


    If you count one source of damage in one attack damage "roll" is 1 damage instance.

    Ex.:
    If you attack with a silver pierce weapon the damage 1d8. The type of weapon and type of damage is counted as same instance, because the both of them do the same damage calc.

    Maybe I can't explain well, but it's just like Silver add a trait to the damage of that weapon, you don't have a specific additional silver damage, it's still a pierce damage but with silver trait. So the both damage is calculated as one, so they have the same damage instance.

    But if you poison this weapon, you add a poison damage to it in another instance (other separated damage calc).

    The same to precision strikes, it's add damage to an attack, but have their own damage formula, so are another instance.


    PossibleCabbage wrote:

    "Neutrality = Balance" isn't really a thing in the ontology of Pathfinder though. Since that sort of thing doesn't make a lot of sense in a metaphysical system where "good" is actually good and not just "self-righteous and equally destructive as evil."

    If you look at the TN deities, they're mostly about "singular focus on their particular area without being particularly concerned about the morality of it" whether it's nature (Gozreh), Magic (Nethys), Clockwork (Brigh), the Fate of all Souls (Pharasma), Time (Shyka),etc.

    Golarion doesn't have a "hold things in balance" deity, so it would be a weird concept for a TN champion cause.

    Not need to be a deity. Maybe just a Faith or Philosophie.

    Ubertron_X wrote:


    As I already wrote in another thread I do not see alignment neutrality as the epitome of balance but as the rejection of extremes, be it political right, political left, anarchists, fanatics or any other group or circumstance. Just leave me alone and let me live my life. Moderation in all things is paramount. Do not fight to get everything or everyone into balance but fight everything or everyone that is trying to get you off balance.

    That the way a think a neutral champion can do too. A "defender of the balance" is more like an anti-extremist than someone who tries to archives the nirvana between the Ying and Yang kkk


    Aratorin wrote:
    That is a substantial nerf to shields, to the point where I can't imagine why your players would even waste time using them. In everyone else's game a standard-grade Adamantine Buckler can prevent 40 points of damage. In your game, it prevents 8. What a waste of 400gp.

    The Adamantine Buckler (uncommon) have only HP 32 and in practice can prevent only 16, after it will be broken and become useless.

    This way it's still not worth buying it

    But with the Samurai rules at last it can be useful to block more damage (8 Hardness) so in my opinion it's now worth to buy.

    Aratorin wrote:


    It gets even worse as the shields get better. An 8,800gp high-grade Adamantine shield prevents 65 points of damage for everyone else, but only 13 for your players. What a great investment at level 16.

    But it's hardness is now 13! But I agree theres better shields than it. It's much better to buy a Sturdy Shield, it not uncommon and provides better defense for only 1.000gp

    But with core rules as said by Draco18s there's a lot more other shields that become useless if you try to block with then at high-level, like Forge Warden (lvl 10), becouse is easy to a criature balanced to face lvl 10 chars do much more damage than the shield BT, or even the Shield HP.

    Aratorin wrote:


    May as well just take the Shield Cantrip and block more damage without ever spending any money, for literally the exact same action economy, and never have to worry about wasting a hand on a shield.

    But will work only 1 time! The shield cantrip broken if you block with it. No matter how much damage.

    CRB wrote:
    While the spell is in effect, you can use the Shield Block reaction with your magic shield (see the sidebar). The shield has Hardness 5. After you use Shield Block, the spell ends and you can’t cast it again for 10 minutes.

    But I agree without a way to do more damage to the shields the things can easily become unbalanced. That the why in my own rules I kept a way to destroy shields, but it isn't based in decision of how much damage the char will receive, but in the opponent weapon type. So they can decide based on this (no more based in damage they take) if they want try to block or not.


    For me it's not to hard to make a True Neutral Champion concept. This is partially done by some classes like monk and druid, and maybe that's the main problem. Such classes already archive this concept, a neutral champion would just another variant from this concept.

  • A true neutral champion would be a champion of the balance. Someone that don't believe that the good or evil, or order or chaos are the right for world. There's gods and philosophies that allow this, so why do not have a champion, some one who believe that's the world need to be balanced and defended from all kinds of radicalisms. It's not too hardly to implement. If the monk represents the inner balance, the neutral champions represents the outer (world) balance.
    His anathema is do or allow the extremism, no matter from it comes.

  • A lawful Champion defends the order. I can easily do it as follower of Abadar. It's a guardian of the order, the civilization, the commerce and fights any chaotic threat no matter if they are good or evil. They can fight against bandits that break the law, or a revolutionary force that whats to down a evil dictator equally.
    His anathema is fight o try take down any kind of organized civilization, but may fight their abuses the break the rules or create chaos.

  • A chaotic Champion is the most complicated one. Being a defender of freedom is too close to Liberator, but I think this is right, maybe the liberator that invades the chaotic rules too much. Maybe a chaotic champion not also a defender of freedom, but someone who fights all order abuses, abusive rules of a country, organizations and civilizations that destroy the wild in name of progress, free even evil creatures that was forced to slavery. It's defensor that the jail isn't the correct solutions for things like criminality (maybe it's believes that eye per eye, or even death is better) and fights any other order abuses.
    His anathema is allow or do lawful abuses like restrict individual freedom, allow wild destruction beyond need to survive, follow abusive rules and other kinds of order like extremisms

    Ps.: I know chaotic champion create some mix of liberator and druid, but as like I said before maybe because such classes entry too much in theses areas. For example, druid are neutral in all D&D based games because the animals/plants are neutral creatures that don't care of alignment, but the druid cares. As natural defender of the wild make much more sense a druid being chaotic than neutral.


  • For me it's depends from what nature these incorporeal creatures are.

    If is a kind of air elemental creature, why it cannot fly freely?
    If is an apparition, probably an inverted astral rules make more sense to it because they a really native of astral plane and not need to follow the same physical laws of the material plane (you can hover and fly like you astral planes).
    If has a caster that magically turned in incorporeal maybe be affected due it's unnatural origin and lack of experience controlling your new form maybe anchor it in the ground.

    There's a lot options to consider and to interpret for each case.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    In fact even if this amulet idea made the things more simple, it's still keeps the fact that shields still an so much expensive (not even in value, but in size too) to be as consume itens even more than they are in reality (real shields don't break from rapier attacks) when you are in an army or are a knight running around everywhere with a squire and a horse it's ok. But in role play this represents that you are very limited to carry many of it around.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Zapp wrote:


    You do know shields are (or were, I guess) consumables?

    Shields were made to be destroyed. You crafted an object which you then wilfully inserted in the path of lethal objects swung at you.

    Of course they got dented and buckled and rent asunder and finally shattered in useless broken pieces.

    That's the main problem. The shields they shouldn't be that consumable!

    Even the most shield occupying just 1 bulk, it's big enough to allow a character to carry more than 2. Even so, where it cannot carry it with a backpack (unless you the backpack on your chest, but this limit you mobility). The only shield I thing that classifies to been carrieable in qty is the bucker. But still complicated change such shield during a encounter.

    Repair the shield on the field requires time, you frequently don't have such time when your are in a DG.

    In reality a knight with a shield have a squire and a horse to carry such things. But in a role play this hard to keep when adventure in a very dungerous fantasy world where you are always in a dungeon, or a dungerous forest, or surround of undeads and so.

    Zapp wrote:


    So no, the problem isn't that your player can't keep hold of his ancestral ale cask lid or whatever, because that's fundamentally misunderstanding what a shield *is*.

    Instead, the real problem is that magical (but not mundane) shields are priced as permanent items, even though the rules make them (easily) destructable.

    Paizo needed to choose between
    a) realistic shields that get destroyed all the time, even multiple times during a single battle
    and
    b) shields as very valuable magic items (that you can't afford to lose)

    They failed to make that choice. THAT is the cause of the problem.

    Cheers

    The main problem is they choose to be fragile with shield that is big, heavy and expensive enough like a weapon, but the weapons are unbreakable but the shields are easily broken. So when you start to turn it a magical things it becomes even worst, becouse your shield become less dispensable but still fragile.

    In other topic Draco18s points the problem this create for Forge Warden magical shield. A expensive lvl 10 magical shield fragile just like any mundane shield, but that need to do a block agains the opponent to activate it's main ability:

    Draco18s wrote:


    ts a level 10 shield with the approximate durability of a level 1 steel shield. And way too expensive to carry "more than one"

    Forge Warden: Hardness 6, HP 24 (BT 12)
    Steel Shield: Hardness 5, HP 20 (BT 10)

    Even the Lion's Shield (a level 6 item) has more hp! (Hardness 6, HP 36)

    And here's the kicker, you can't use a Forge Warden's shield--for its ability, you know, the reason you own one--unless you block an attack with it and have the shield take damage. That's two attacks from a cave bear (a trivial fight at Lv -4) to break that shield (average damage is 15).

    Fight a triceratops (moderate at Lv -2) and its average damage will break the shield in one hit (67% odds).

    Fight a deinonychus (tough at Lv -1) and its minimum damage is only 3 points shy of breaking the shield (with a 10% chance of destroying it outright!)


    Alternative Shield Block Rules

  • If you block with a Shield Block reaction you no longer take damage to the shield, just reduce the damage you take by Hardness.
  • The Shield Block only affects physical damages.
  • The Shield still can be damage if someone directly attacks it, just like Sunder attacks.
  • Shield Block feat is no more a General feat, it's now a Class/Archtype feat that can be acquired as Archtype part of Champions feats (Feat 4) (after you take Champion Dedication).

    To avoid fighters/champ's only block ability, I changed the Shield cantrip too:

    Alternative Shield Cantrip Block Rules

  • Shield cantrip now are now 2 actions (Verbal,Somatic) but if not destroyed it can be sustained with 1 action using the default Sustain a Spell rules.
  • If you Block with Shield Cantrip it's destroyed but you can cast it again (no more 10min interval).
  • If used to block Magic Missiles, just block 1 missile and +1 additional for each Heightened (3rd,5th,7th,9th).

    New Weapon Trait - Sunder

    If you can make a strike against an opponent and if the opponent's shield is risen, instead yo can attack their shield. If destroyed, damage that excess the shield's hit points is applied to that shield's wielder.
    Risen Shield AC: A risen shield have the same AC that their wielder including AC from an equipped armor but cannot include the shield AC bonus. But Bucklers still keeps their +1 AC bonus because their small size.
    Obs.: Reactive Shield Class Feat doesn't count for Sunder because the shield rises only during the reaction.

    Weapons with Sunder Trait:

  • Battle axe
  • Greataxe
  • Dwarven waraxe
  • Orc necksplitter
  • Maul
  • Warhammer
  • Gnome hooked hammer

    Nem Monk Feat

    Sunder Strike - Feat 2 [Monk]:
    If you can make a strike against an opponent and the opponent's shield is risen, instead you can attack their shield with unarmed attacks. If destroyed, damage that excess the shield's hit points is applied to that shield's wielder.
    You can also broken other non-equiped things using your bare hands, like divide rocks, broke tiles in half, brake down doors and windows, break containers or open any object forcefully! You can use your monk's unarmed attack proficiency instead of Athletics skill to Force Open an object, you don't receive the -2 from not using a crowbar. When used in this way you always broke the object, even if have a Critical Success.


  • When I was testing some situations for Sunder, I notice that many cases where I can do some strange damage situations, like a rapier broking a shield! 😂 So I had the idea to change it from a action to be an additional Weapon Trait for some weapons:

  • Battle ax
  • Greataxe
  • Dwarven waraxe
  • Orc necksplitter
  • Maul
  • Warhammer
  • Gnome hooked hammer

    This way if a char that have one of these weapons can choose to attack a shield risen instead of it's wielder.

    This weapons was choice was made in the fact that these weapons are based in tools that were used to cut wood (axes) and broke and bend steel (hammers). So make sense that such weapons can easily damage shields and I removed the lighter options (those who have Finesse or Agil) to avoid have too many weapon with that trait and to represent that the stronger ones is better to do such job.

    Now i'm thinking how can make a Monk Feat to include Sunder as disarmed attack.


  • 1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Samurai wrote:

    This ridiculous "decide whether to block AFTER you know the damage" rule will never see play at my table, or most people's I think.

    If you are using that rule, then the complaint about the Rogue's Nimble Dodge being a reaction shouldn't apply either, simply have the GM roll the attack against the Rogue, and if it is within 2 points, inform the player and allow them to use their reaction to make the attack miss if the Rogue wants. That way there is never a risk of the Rogue using Nimble Dodge and possibly having the +2 AC bonus not mattering one way or the other... it ALWAYS works, and never wastes your reaction on an attack that would have missed anyways.

    And why stop there? If an attack drops you to 0 HP, change you action the previous round to drink a healing potion instead of moving so that you now have enough HP to survive the hit!

    Play should follow a simple order IMO. The player decides what to do on their turn. If the enemies attack the PC, the PC must decide how to use their reaction for the attack before knowing if the attack hits or misses, and definitely before the damage from a hit is rolled. The game's rules should not require you to go back in time to change things that have already happened in the game, and if they do, then that is a rule that needs fixing IMO.

    I agree. Excuse me. I don't want to offend anyone, especially the designers who did a great job with the rules. but the Shield Block is the most strange, non-sense, out of order rule in the entire 2e!

    Jared Walter 356 wrote:


    Attacks follow a simple flow:

    1) Declare target
    2) Roll and identity modifiers
    3) calculate result
    4) compare to DC AC (ie hit/miss)
    5) Roll Damage
    6) Determine Damage type
    7) Apply Resistances/Immunities
    8) If damage remains deduct it from HP.

    We know how the rule works. We know that it create more tactical options in combat. But it still a strange maneuver where a char can block/reduce any attack no matter how precisely is it because it was made after the damage has been calc, just like it was a divination magic but it's just a block, and create even more strange consequences and even some "unbalances" in game.

    It's broken non-magical shields too fast if used against big damages, create a situations where the player with I shield will just receive "high" damages, because the most players chose to block only when the damage is smaller or next to their shield hardness creating a gap in the damage (this make then to choose receive the entire high damage and ignoring any low damage attacks, making this unatural for interpretations), and as the game level evolves and the damage increases, the shield block starts to become useless in face of more strongest enemies forcing the players to constantly upgrade their shields to a better Sturdy Shield version and so on ... There are so many other idiosyncrasies created by it that's is hard to list and explain all.

    After all this rule working in a way that simply doesn't fell right!

    To be honest, my first impression when I understand how it's work was "I will ban this thing from my games" but there are several other things in the game that depends on it, so now i'm trying to discuss an alternative to it.

    And how more I read and discuss about this rule and better understand it and what situations this can create, worst it became. That's why I'm trying to create an alternative homebrew rule in other topic.


    jdripley wrote:


    Against the complaint that any enemy, or a few enemies, can attack you a few times in a round - that is irrelevant to the discussion about shields. You need your reaction to block, and you only get one reaction a turn (aside from a few higher level class feats), so you can only block once per turn. Yes it's dangerous for your character to be attacked repeatedly, but the shield will only ever take a max of one attack per turn.

    Uh! Not exactly, some feats allow to reuse-it again:

    Core Rulebook wrote:


    QUICK BLOCK FEAT 8
    CHAMPION
    You can block with your shield instinctively. At the start of each of your turns, you gain an additional reaction that you can use only to perform a Shield Block.

    Sorry I don't intent to create a rule war. The main propose of this topic is discuss how to improve the Shield Block rule to become more plausible and more balanced between several situations where the core rule doesn't work or even make sense.

    So I point the most of the cases where the original rule create abnormal situations.


    New revision for my Alternative Shield Block Rules.

    Alternative Shield Block Rules


    • - If you block with a Shield Block reaction you no longer take damage to the shield, just reduce the damage you take by Hardness.
    • - The Shield Block only affects physical damages.
    • - The Shield still can be damage if someone directly attacks it, just like Sunder attacks.
    • - Shield Block feat is no more a General feat, it's now a Class/Archtype feat that can be acquired as Archtype part of Champions feats (Feat 4) (after you take Champion Dedication).

    To avoid fighters/champ's only block ability, I changed the Shield cantrip too:

    Alternative Shield Cantrip Block Rules


    • - Shield cantrip now are now 2 actions (Verbal,Somatic) but if not destroyed it can be sustained with 1 action using the default Sustain a Spell rules.
    • - If you Block with Shield Cantrip it's destroyed but you can cast it again (no more 10min interval).
    • - If used to block Magic Missiles, just block 1 missile and +1 additional for each Heightened (3rd,5th,7th,9th).

    New Action Sunder:
    Sunder [1 action] (attack): Make a strike against an opponent, but instead if the opponent shield is risen, apply the damage to their shield. Damage in excess of the shield's hit points is applied to that shield's wielder.
    Risen Shield AC: A risen shield have the same AC that their wielder including AC from an equipped armor but cannot include the shield AC bonus. But Bucklers keeps their +1 AC bonus because their small size.
    Obs.: Reactive Shield Class Feat doesn't count for Sunder because the shield rises only during the reaction.

    Tnx:
    These alternative rules are based on Samurai homebrew rule for blocks (thanks) in order to improve the shield block rules, and keep the game faster...
    I removed non physical damages from the blocks, because when the jdripley commented about the Cleric Shield Feats,(thanks) I re-read it and notice that EMBLAZON ENERGY Feat allow the player to chose what additional damage type the Shield can block from acid, cold, electricity, fire, or sonic. So it cannot block those damages by defaut (another miss explanation for Shield Block in core rules found out of their description).
    Thank rainzax for the idea about Sunder.


    rainzax wrote:

    Sounds like you want shields to break less often. May I suggest:

    A shield sustains 1 HP each time it is used to successfully to block damage.

    Finally, a new attack action allowing for the targeting of protective shields specifically:

    Sunder (A) (attack): Make a strike against an opponent, but instead apply the damage to their shield. Damage in excess of the shield's hit points is applied to that shield's wielder.

    Cheers.

    interesting but such new attack maybe will aggravate the problem of normal shields weakness. Because instead the shield receive damage only when blocking, it will only receive damage when directly attacked. The main problem is that even if not rised the shield can be attacked. But if we limit the Sunder attacks to only attack rised shields this can be a interesting way to break a shield when using my alternative shield block rules and also can make some class feats like Shield Warden, Shield Reckoning and Reactive Shield more interesting:

    [b]Sunder (A) (attack): Make a strike against an opponent, but instead if the opponent shield is risen, apply the damage to their shield. Damage in excess of the shield's hit points is applied to that shield's wielder.[/i]
    Risen Shield AC: A risen shield have the same AC that their holder including AC from an equipped armor (because the heavier is ther armor more plucky the shield holder can be to protect the own shield) but cannot include the shield AC bonus (because the shield AC is based on it's size, this don't help when you try to protect your own shield). Bucklers receive +1 AC bonus because their small size. (this bonus changes based in owner size)

    With Sunder being the only way to damage shields, Shield Warden and Shield of Reckoning reactions can be used to protect allies without risk to damage the shield and creates interesting new opportunities to use Reactive Shield reaction.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    jdripley wrote:
    Your eagle doing 2d8+5 has an average damage of 10. Hardness will reduce that to 5, which both the player and the shield will take. It will actually take 2 blocked strikes from that eagle to break the shield, and then it's an easy repair to get the shield back up and running. How long are most combats? 2-5 rounds probably? That seems just about right to me.

    OK, let's think better about this!

    You are a playing with a Fighter, then you and your party face an 2 Giant Eagles. One of these Eagles moves (1 action) and start to attack you (other action) and roll 2d8+5 of dmg, and you have a shield with 10 BT. You really want to risk loose your shield AC trying to block it!? And remenber it have another action to attack you more even before it's turn ends.

    The first of all, if your GM allow you to use block after know the DMG, you will only block if the damage is low, and you take the most os high damages. Creating the damage gap where the shield owner only take high damages creating an ungly meta-game, turng the fight much more Machine Coded and making a masoquist like char kkk
    If your GM don't allow it (in the fair name of the coherence) almost all players will not risk to loose you shield AC because the eagle can roll a 16!

    You are not risking to loose a shield in 2-5 rounds, you are risking in the first attack!

    And this become worst. If you are a more multi-defense class like a Champion that can use Shield Block to protect the others, many times you have to face a shield lost or do a bad/strange interpretation or you can even loose your powers (a champion that don't protects the more weaker companion because he are afraid to loose his shield).

    Let's be honest, the core Shield Block is useless if are not in a really low level adventure or if you don't have a magical reinforced shield.

    jdripley wrote:


    There is nothing preventing you from carrying more than 1 shield. Dropping a broken shield is a free action, then you just need to draw your second shield and you're good to go for another few rounds.

    Oh! I see a character carrying 4 shield in his back!? Are you selling shields?

    As GM I will never allow a player to rapidly take a shield that are attached over other shields without wasting a last 3 actions! And even you are carrying just 1 additional shield, you still have to waste an action releasing the shield from your back (this probably with just one hand becouse you are holding a weapon with the other), other action to take this new shield and another one to rise it. So you loose you entire turn to change shields! (and the your foe probably will attack you again! And you can loose your shield again)
    Remember that you can loose your new shield too fast facing a just level 3 monster and this will become worse as the adventure progress.

    jdripley wrote:


    Another possibility is to find a way to get the Shield Cantrip. You don't have to repair the Shield Cantrip,

    Yea, but it will broke automatically in first block (don't matter the damage), then will have to wait 10min to cast it again. Even the idea of carry 2 shield is way better, and you don't have to loose a Class Feat to do it.

    jdripley wrote:


    Better shields start becoming available at Level 4, Sturdy Shields. There are a whole mess of them that are quite good. Especially when combined with Champion/Cleric which gets feats to improve their shield.

    This create the another problem that I mentioned. The Magical Shields Races. At level 4 all martial class players now are looking for a magical shield, all the humanoid martial class foes will have a magical shield (or will be constantly will loose their shield agaisnt players, or the GM will stop to count the NPC shield HP because is too painful), maybe even the innkeeper's daughter will already have a magical shield kkkk.

    jdripley wrote:


    Often the complaint comes up "but then I need to rely on my GM being generous and making those better shields available!" But I'd like to remind everybody that's not a problem with the shield rules, that's a problem with the GM.

    Maybe because the GM wants that the magical itens become magical!? Some thing like: You conquest a dungeon and found a magic sword! Cool! You defeated a strong foe and take his magical shield! Nice!

    I don't want to change all mundane thing to magical ones just because you need change your shield to a better magical one because the old one became outdated. I don't want the chars always needing to magically upgrading their itens per level likes they are olds smartphones needing to be replaced.

    'm a brazilian player, so my english is not the best and some of my references is a translated PF2e. So sorry if I made some bad english.

    1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>