Shield Bash

As our fledgling group delves deeper into the PF game my players have started to find the "best" paths or min/max paths for their respective characters. I have a fighter in my group atm that it creating a TWF Shield bash build. As I am an old DnDer I take alot of preconceptions from 3.5 and unconsciously apply them to my PF game.

When my player showed me Improved Shield Bash I thought it was a typo. Improved Shield Bash is far better than Improved Two Weapon Defense, so much so its seems PF wants to push fighters into Sword and Board build exclusively. But what my player showed me next just blew me away. Shield spikes coupled with Shield Bashing magical ability. At only a +1 cost to his shield he can now triple die bump his shield damage!

I'm sorry but doing 2D6 with your Off hand whilst still retaining shield bonus seems untterly broken and I told him he could'nt do it, even thou now I see it is a legal build. IMO this has effectively eliminated TWF as a viable min/max and has relegated it to a colour build. I would hazard to say that Sword and Board far out weighs Two Handed fighting as a min/max build for ANY fighter.

Am I reading this right? Alot of the archived threads I've read seem to back this up, but there also seems to be alot of gripping over Improved Shield bash and Shield Mastery. But the Shield spike + Shield Bashing ability stack just puts it over the edge for me. I have always told my players that they cannot "bump" their weapon damage dice more than once. The only exception being Large build, permanent Enlarge person etc. This player at level 7 has an insane AC 26 ish and can deal full attack damage in the 40-60 damage range, currently because he hasn't taken power attack but his potential to do damage is unprecedented and easily game breaking.

Ok, cool off a minute and think about this:

Two weapon fighting is composed primarily of 3 feats -- with a maximum of 5 if you want to include double slice and two weapon defense.

Now if you instead specialize in two weapon fighting with a shield then you have a feat tax of 7:
two weapon fighting
improved two weapon fighting
greater two weapon fighting
improved shield bash
shield slam
shield mastery
double slice

So for three extra feats you get extra abilities. The price is paid and if you use the heavy shield then you are fighting with an one handed weapon.

Don't forget this still requires you to close with your opponent, as oppose to simply standing back and using a longbow.

IMO it should be and either/or situation TWF or sword and shield. Doesnt bash and slam "only" include shield? Therefore Two "weapon" designate "weapon" and exclude shield. I mean shields are part of armour and not found in weapons. Razor shield and spiked shields are special but only in that if you use them to attack you cannot use them to defend next round? right? My rangers almost to a pc are TWFs. So their fighting style is to start out with the ranged attacks with the bow then move up into melee range and switch over to melee weapons. My fighters are either Sword and board or TWFs.
So if your fighter chooses to attack with his shield then he looses whatever AC bounus the shield gives him for an entire round.

I'm sorry but doing 2D6 with your Off hand whilst still retaining shield bonus seems untterly broken and I told him he could'nt do it, even thou now I see it is a legal build. IMO this has effectively eliminated TWF as a viable min/max and has relegated it to a colour build. I would hazard to say that Sword and Board far out weighs Two Handed fighting as a min/max build for ANY fighter.

Just a quick note, to get 2d6 as a medium creature he is using Heavy shield/bashing/and shield spikes. This is giving him a -4 to his main hand and offhand attacks. A heavy shield even mithral is still a one handed weapon, so make sure he is taking that -4 even with TWF feats. If he goes to a light shield the damage drops to 1d8 (w/bashing and spikes) and the normal TWF penalties apply.

IMO it should be and either/or situation TWF or sword and shield. Doesnt bash and slam "only" include shield? Therefore Two "weapon" designate "weapon" and exclude shield. I mean shields are part of armour and not found in weapons. Razor shield and spiked shields are special but only in that if you use them to attack you cannot use them to defend next round? right? My rangers almost to a pc are TWFs. So their fighting style is to start out with the ranged attacks with the bow then move up into melee range and switch over to melee weapons. My fighters are either Sword and board or TWFs.

So if your fighter chooses to attack with his shield then he looses whatever AC bounus the shield gives him for an entire round.

shield bash the feat lets you TWF with shield and keep Ac bonus

Nerfherder wrote:

I'm sorry but doing 2D6 with your Off hand whilst still retaining shield bonus seems untterly broken and I told him he could'nt do it, even thou now I see it is a legal build. IMO this has effectively eliminated TWF as a viable min/max and has relegated it to a colour build. I would hazard to say that Sword and Board far out weighs Two Handed fighting as a min/max build for ANY fighter.

Just a quick note, to get 2d6 as a medium creature he is using Heavy shield/bashing/and shield spikes. This is giving him a -4 to his main hand and offhand attacks. A heavy shield even mithral is still a one handed weapon, so make sure he is taking that -4 even with TWF feats. If he goes to a light shield the damage drops to 1d8 (w/bashing and spikes) and the normal TWF penalties apply.

I believe Shield Mastery eliminate all penelties however the fighter needs to be level 11 to take it.

I much like many other DMs our there do allow alot of 3.5 material and Oversized two weapon fighting can be a viable lower level option to drop that penelty from -4/-4 to -2/-2. Be that as it may I am still having a hard time getting my head around being able to do 2D6 Off hand damage, even in 3.5 a fighter with Exotic Weap Prof Bastard Sword duel wielding does only 1D10 Off hand. Remember Monkey Gripping Bastard Swords was FAQed hence my house ruling that players cannot stack weapon Die bumps.

As for having to use alot of feats to make this work, a human fighter gets a feat at every level and 2 and first I don't see how this would be a prob. It just seems to me that PF is pushing Sword and Board as the most viable option for fighters over ALL other builds.

Well, historically, a skilled warrior could consistently do massive damage to oppponents with his shield whether they were heavily armored or not. I have seen a shield bash attack in real life generate over 45 g's of force. That is enough to snap your neck and scramble your brain at the same time if hit in the head.

This being the case, I have no problem letting fighters, or anyone else, train up their shield usage and go to town.

From a game mechanics stand point, a PF tank needs to be fairly mobile, moderately hard to hit, and able to deliver a great deal of pain to his enemies. If he can't do these things, the mooks have nothing to deter them from swarming the wizard and his mighty 10d6 fireball (or whatever).

It just seems to me that PF is pushing Sword and Board as a viable option for fighters over ALL other builds.

Fixed. S&B sucked hard previously.

Now you can do it, even if it's feat intensive. It's just that.

The damage die is rather meaningless, especially for TWF fighters. Using different weapons in each hand is also suboptimal for fighters. Improved shield bash might offer better AC, but dual kukri is much better for damage and critical feats.

Also, remember the guy dual wielding bastard swords, longswords, short swords or whatever gets off much lighter with Weapon Training, Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, Weapon Specialisation, Greater Weapon Specialisation.

I think many of us had the same kneejerk reaction you did when they spotted that combo, but honestly its nothing. Hes paying greater feat expenditure (even more so when compared to dual wielding the same weapon) for a greater gain- and its a -4/-4 as the shield is heavy.

I am currently using the Phalanx Solider archetype and I have built my character to shield bash and bull rush. I am currently level 8, and with the -4 to both primary and secondary because of my large shield, I often think twice about using it against challenging opponents.

In future levels, I will be able to remove the -4 to my shield only (shield mastery only applies to the shield, not the primary weapon) and deal amazing damage, but the feat tree for shield bashing and weapon focus feats for my spear and bull rushing is enough to keep me from finishing the feat tree until about level 15.

Also, remember the guy dual wielding bastard swords, longswords, short swords or whatever gets off much lighter with Weapon Training, Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, Weapon Specialisation, Greater Weapon Specialisation.

All those feats can be applied to Shields in PF. I'm still not convinced.

Even DW Falcatas will have a hard time competing with Shield bashing with OH, when it comes to damage output, I just can't get my head around 2D6 base weap damage on a off hand. I understand PF is high powered gaming but this trend really relegates most melee classes to the SB template leaving any other template ie: 2Weapon and 2H weapon fighting just for colour. Remember the 2 weapon / 2H weapon fighter isn't getting that AC boost...

+2 Heavy Shield +5 Enhancement +1 Shield Focus +1 Greater Shield focus

+9 to AC is a far cry from that +1 shield bonus you are getting from 2 Weapon Defense, or that +4 Shield bonus from Shield of Swings which nerfs your damage output.

Also to address the -4/-4 penalty so far it hasn't had much of an affect on combat for this particular player has had no problem hitting. When you look at the buffs and combat advantages you can get out there such as flanking the penalty kinda evaporates. Besides my point is even duel wielding Bastard Swords which is -4/-4 still doesn't yield the Off hand damage of using a heavy shield that stacks Spikes and magic Bashing ability.

It really still seems to me that PF is trying to steer melee builds towards Sword and Board exclusively. Any other build is a gimp of your character.

Any other build is a gimp of your character.

Lol. No.

Alexander Kilcoyne wrote:

Also, remember the guy dual wielding bastard swords, longswords, short swords or whatever gets off much lighter with Weapon Training, Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, Weapon Specialisation, Greater Weapon Specialisation.

All those feats can be applied to Shields in PF. I'm still not convinced.

Your missing the point.

Guy with two bastard swords spends five feats to get Improved Critical, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialisation, Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialisation to affect every attack he makes.

Sword and Board must spend ten feats to do this- because Weapon Focus (Longsword) or whatever hes using in conjunction with the shield won't apply to the shield itself.

The same with weapon groups- the first fighter took heavy blades as his first group and has max bonuses on both his weapons- the second fighter took blades first then Close to get a lesser bonus on his shield.

Base damage dice is almost irrelevant in light of this.

Did you come here to get guidance from veterans who know what they are talking about, or did you just come here to tell us we're all wrong? You imply your new to PF from 3.5, so open those earholes and listen good son :P.

Edit: For what its worth, dual wielding falcatas would be cheaper with feats and come out to a much higher DPR. Base damage dice isn't as relevant as crit range and modifier- remember the falchion was the king of 3.5...

Second Edit: Someone who has the time run the DPR math on two falcata's vs sword board at pretty much any level, I can guarantee it comes out higher...

Your missing the point.

Yes I get it Swords and Shields are 2 different weapons and if you want to have all those feats applied to both hands it requires a doubling of feats.

Did you come here to get guidance from veterans who know what they are talking about, or did you just come here to tell us we're all wrong? You imply your new to PF from 3.5, so open those earholes and listen good son :P.

I am...are you? My OP has 2 parts. In one I address an issue wherein a player can triple die bump his weapon damage. In the second part I iterate my concern that a melee fighter using a shield as a weapon can also gain all the defensive benefits with the cost of one feat. These 2 items IMO makes Sword and Board the most viable melee class option. Shield Bash plus spikes makes that Shield both a weapon and a defensive device, something that NO other melee build can do.

I have more of a problem with the second part than I do the first part. I have 2 melee classes in my current campaign one sword and board and one is a 2 Hand wielder. Even thou I allow the 2H build player to take a Goliath and allowed him to monkey grip a Goliath great hammer his toon has dropped below 0 hp on 4 separate occasions whereas the Sword and Board player leaves most fights almost unscratched. SO far I haven't seen any major difference in damage output for either player, they are about the same.

IMO Shields should not be relegated to "just another weapon" that just happens to provide defense. I remember a great article in Dragon years ago from Len Lakofka wherein he created a simple system where fighters used their shields to parry attacks. Isn't that basically what they are for?

Shield Bash feat pound for pound the best single combat feat, it seems clear the focus for melee class builds is Sword and Board

If I remember correctly, James Jacob said that Shield spikes and the Shield Bashing magical ability were never meant to stack. You attack with the spikes (piercing damage) OR the magical shield (bludgeoning damage), but the spikes can't benefit from the Shield Bashing magical ability.

If I remember correctly, James Jacob said that Shield spikes and the Shield Bashing magical ability were never meant to stack. You attack with the spikes (piercing damage) OR the magical shield (bludgeoning damage), but the spikes can't benefit from the Shield Bashing magical ability.

If you could find a link to that, or perhaps some errata on the situation, that would be great.

I think the OP here is concerned that the RaW, in this situation, has made one build far mor powerful than every other build. The concern is that, since there are 2 primarily melée characters in this group, the 2h fighter will enjoy the game far less the the sword and board fighter. The primary problem seems to be survivability.

I am inclined to agree with the OPs concerns here. When one player outshines another in a similar role, he has less fun. At the same time however, many above posters have pointed out that sword and board appears to be VERY feat intensive (I have not fully checked everything myself). The 2weapon fighter will probably be the star at low level, and focus will shift to the shield user at high level.

From a DM standpoint, i can also see a problem here, as i am having a similar problem with summoner in my campaign. The eidelon's AC is 8 higher than anyone else in the party, and effectively has twice as many hit points, since the summoner can take dmg for the eidelon. It is hard to challenge a group with such different levels of power, without going over the edge and totally overpowering them, causing a TPK.

As far as damage output goes, i would be less concerned. There are plenty of ways to increase damage output. It's the out of control defenses that concern me as a DM. It is, to an extent, the job of the DM to provide encounters that will allow everyone to shine. In the OPs situation, i would say an appropriate encounter to help the 2h fighter shine, might be as follows.

Large group of enemies, most of which are, or have levels in, rogue. That way, the 2 fighters can each take a group of targets, and the wizard can't simply blast them to pieces.

Maerimydra wrote:

If I remember correctly, James Jacob said that Shield spikes and the Shield Bashing magical ability were never meant to stack. You attack with the spikes (piercing damage) OR the magical shield (bludgeoning damage), but the spikes can't benefit from the Shield Bashing magical ability.

If you could find a link to that, or perhaps some errata on the situation, that would be great.

I think the OP here is concerned that the RaW, in this situation, has made one build far mor powerful than every other build.

We understand the premise, hes just incorrect (DPR wise anyway). Its also THE most feat intensive route possible, so if it was the best build its at the expense of other feats.

If I remember correctly, James Jacob said that Shield spikes and the Shield Bashing magical ability were never meant to stack. You attack with the spikes (piercing damage) OR the magical shield (bludgeoning damage), but the spikes can't benefit from the Shield Bashing magical ability.

Is this the post you're looking for?

The people are attempting to put your mind at ease.

A TWF will get huge mileage out of the spec feats. You cannot dual wield shields.

This means that a dual wielding person gets his full Greater Weapon Spec bonuses on both his weapons. That really, really takes care of the damage problem. Going to 2-12 dmg means nothing compared to fixed bonuses.

To do the same with both weapons, the S&B guy has to blow 12 feats! Shield SPec and Imp Shield bash are now feat taxes. He can't even finish the basic Spec tree until level 11, and NOW he has to worry about getting multiple attacks out of TWF...three more feats, now we're at level 14, and we haven't even taken shield mastery.

For his entire career, the Shield fighter is going to be behind the dmg curve vs a TWF, simply because of feat costs and synergies. At high levels, he's got a weapon with a lousy crit.

He is going to end up with:
A higher AC (which he had anyways)
vs
anywhere from 5-8 feats down.
Having to pay the gold for a shield AND another weapon...so behind on gold.
No feat synergy.
Less damage and less to-hit.

Seriously, this looks dangerous at low levels, but all it does is make the style VIABLE, hardly dominant vs monsters.

Most likely, your friend will be taking the shield as his primary weapon spec and using a light weapon in the off hand to minimize his TH penalties, perhaps even relegating it to just Defending, and if he's smart, won't even try for TWF because of the feat cost.

Step back, look at the costs for what he's trying to do, and you'll see it's not nearly the problem you think it is.

==Aelryinth

Since we are talking shields and dual wielding, I wanted to run this past you guys. I started a Kingmaker game recently and one of the players is doing the TWF & sword and board thing. I am letting him use a heavy steel shield in his main hand and a short sword in is off hand so he is only doing the -2/-2 penalty. I works for my game fine my question is by RAW is it cool?

Since we are talking shields and dual wielding, I wanted to run this past you guys. I started a Kingmaker game recently and one of the players is doing the TWF & sword and board thing. I am letting him use a heavy steel shield in his main hand and a short sword in is off hand so he is only doing the -2/-2 penalty. I works for my game fine my question is by RAW is it cool?

Strangely enough I have been reading the forums today alot about this issue lol. And yes what I have found is the game is basically silent on the issue and assumes that players are using a shield in their OH and sword in main but there is nothing saying they cannot main hand a shield and say OH a hand axe or dagger. I allow Over Sized Two weapon fighting in my Kingmaker campaign it is from The Complete Warrior, it kinda eliminates the need for this chicanery.

The Shield as main weapon and sword as second hand works fine. No reason you can't use the shield in your main hand, and since it's a better weapon once tricked out, works fine.

When you get shield mastery, it's actually really useful. Up until then, it's a sub-par TWF build dmgwise, but lets you keep your AC.

==Aelryinth

Nerfherder, you seem just to be mad that you now have to adjust CRs to account for the fighter.

IMO, quit whinning, let your player play what he wants (especially since its ok by RAW), and step up as the referee.

8)

Maerimydra wrote:

If I remember correctly, James Jacob said that Shield spikes and the Shield Bashing magical ability were never meant to stack. You attack with the spikes (piercing damage) OR the magical shield (bludgeoning damage), but the spikes can't benefit from the Shield Bashing magical ability.

Is this the post you're looking for?

Thank you, Joana. :)

Dedlin wrote:

Nerfherder wrote:

I'm sorry but doing 2D6 with your Off hand whilst still retaining shield bonus seems untterly broken and I told him he could'nt do it, even thou now I see it is a legal build. IMO this has effectively eliminated TWF as a viable min/max and has relegated it to a colour build. I would hazard to say that Sword and Board far out weighs Two Handed fighting as a min/max build for ANY fighter.

Just a quick note, to get 2d6 as a medium creature he is using Heavy shield/bashing/and shield spikes. This is giving him a -4 to his main hand and offhand attacks. A heavy shield even mithral is still a one handed weapon, so make sure he is taking that -4 even with TWF feats. If he goes to a light shield the damage drops to 1d8 (w/bashing and spikes) and the normal TWF penalties apply.

I believe Shield Mastery eliminate all penelties however the fighter needs to be level 11 to take it.

It only eliminates the penalties for the shield. the weapon would still be at -4.

Nerfherder, you seem just to be mad that you now have to adjust CRs to account for the fighter.

IMO, quit whinning, let your player play what he wants (especially since its ok by RAW), and step up as the referee.

8)

Although we ultimately want everyone to be able to play the character that they want to play, it is at the same time, unfair to force the GM to do extra work to adjust everything to make it appropriately challenging. Even more so if the GM runs published campaigns because he doesn't have time to do it from scratch. And even so if that player relegates another PC with similar class role to nothing more than second fiddle (as the OP mentioned the vastly different levels of survivability between the two fighters in his campaign). Remember, the object is for everyone to have fun, not have one player watch another have fun.

That being said, i do agree with some of the other posters about the number of feats S&B requires. The consensus seams to be that the feat tree rounds out around level 15, and allows for practically no deviation. Sort of the opposite of the old saying, "jack of all trades, master of none". The S&B fighter will be highly specialized, while the other fighter will be far more rounded and be able to handle a variety of situations. I personally prefer a well rounded character, as opposed to the hyper-specialized build, but that's just me...

If you are looking for advice OP, i would suggest to your non-S&B fighter to focus more on what i call combat tricks (bull rush, trip, etc). I made a very satisfying Trip Fighter one time. Trip from 10 feet away, 5 foot step to adjacent, attack prone target with remaining attacks. The only possible hang-up on that strategy, is if you are a stickler for attacks going in order. Personally i expect players to start at highest BAB and work their way down (i think that's RaW anyway, but might be carrying over from 3.5 again). However, i have never put any concern on wether or not you do all your main hand attacks first, or all of your off hand attacks. Might be something you want to discuss with your players to make sure everyone is on the same page.

Yes, a TWF sword+board fighter can be an effective option. You can focus early on with a heavy spiked shield (1d6/x2) and a light weapon (short sword, light mace, sickle, or dagger); invest in a few javelins for ranged attacks, also.

You will lag behind the "normal" TWF type (and the two-handed weapon type, of course) in DPR and have fewer options for ranged attacks, but can have a higher AC (potentially much higher with defending shield spikes). You will also have to invest more heavily in feats and magic items. There are always trade-offs (the poor criticals from the shield are another). Generally speaking, damage is only so-so until +11 BAB (when you can take Shield Slam and Two Weapon Rend). Shield Slam's free bull rush attempt is really the best benefit of this style other than the higher AC.

As I am an old DnDer I take alot of preconceptions from 3.5 and unconsciously apply them to my PF game.

I am sorry this just makes me laugh.

Improved shield bash. Exact word for word copy from 3.5 srd.
Spiked Shield. Exact word for word copy from 3.5 srd.
Bashing Property. Exact word for word copy from 3.5 srd.

*Note that James Jacob has posted that in Pathfinder Spiked Shield and the Bashing property don't stack. Despite using identical text to 3.5 where they did stack.

These have nothing to do with the reason shields have become viable in pathfinder when they were not in 3.5.

Reason why the shield looks better now.

1) Power attack now effects off hand attacks. (Before 2HD power attack was the ONLY way to go).
2) Animated Shield limited to 4 rounds. (So everyone doesnt just have a floating shield)
3) Superior shield feats (Shield Slam and Shield Mastery)

I honestly think 2 weapon fighting with Shield and Weapon against 2 weapon fighting with 2 of the same weapons. Are reasonably balanced. One gives more offense one gives more defense.

Particularly if you don't let people create their own custom super shield. As you'll notice WotC nor Paizo has not yet published a shield with both weapon enchantments and shield enhancements on the same item. (In fact finding a shield with just just weapon enhancements is difficult.)

OP:
I think I finally understand what you are trying to get at here.

You have two main points that you are constantly coming back to. The first is that the potential damage output is crazy high from the combination of shield spikes and the magical bashing ability. The second point is that because of the high damage the sword and board option is the best hands down for a fighter.

To start, if you think something is broken as a DM, don't allow it. I wouldn't allow the shield spikes to be enhanced by the bashing magical ability, and my DM wouldn't allow it either. The reasoning is just as James Jacobs pointed out, which is the fact that Bashing is an enhancement for a shield, and the spikes are a weapon. As weapons cannot benefit from shield enhancements, the spikes damage wouldn't be changed.

So issue one solved there. Now the most damage the medium sized shield can deal is 1d8. That seems fair, balanced, and proper.

As for the sword and board option being the best? That is really just a matter of opinion. As someone who currently plays a sword and board, lets look at some of the benefits and drawbacks of this build.

Benefits:
Additional Defense: With two shield focus feats and magical enhancements, the heavy shield can end up giving you a whooping +9 to AC.

Additional Attack: The heavy shield, with the right feats and enhancements can be a viable off hand attack. The damage can be decent, but not overpowered (if you rule spikes and bashing don't stack.)

Cool Special Ability: With one feat, Shield Slam, you can even knock your target prone. Add on a few feats for bull rushing, and you can shield bash, deal damage, gain a free bull rush, force the target to provoke attacks of opportunity from adjacent allies, and knock them prone once they hit a wall.

Drawback:
Damage: You will always be behind other two weapon fighters for damage, simply because you have to invest feats into the shield and you can't duel wield shields. The best two weapon fighters use the same weapon in both hands, and thus almost all their feats will help both attacks. Also, unless you really want second and third off-hand attacks and take the feats for them, you can't hit as often as other two weapon fighters.

Feats: You have to take so many feats to really play a good S&B fighter. Why? Well normally a fighter will follow feat trees to focus on cool tricks and abilities, like using intimidate to soften their foes, or being masters of some of the combat maneuvers. Fighting with a shield is a cool combat trick, and thus needs feats. For example, to be a good shield basher with my current fighter, I will have taken 8 feats by level 11. The other feats? Weapon focus (spear), Weapon specialization (spear), power attack, dazzling display, and greater weapon focus (spear). I could easily change the spear to shield in three of those feats. If I playing a Two Handed Weapon fighter, then those 8 feats would go towards what ever trick or ability I wanted to focus on.

Gold: You needs lots of it. Maybe not as much as a two weapon fighter, because magic weapons do cost more then magic armor. The S&B fighter needs to keep primary weapon, armor and shield updated. If armor check penalties are something you care about, then it gets even more expensive as you need a mithral shield and maybe mithral armor. If the shield is going to be used often enough to attack, then it will need weapon enhancements, and that is more expensive then just keeping it updated as a piece of armor.

You Can't Use a Shield as a primary weapon: Check it out, in the shield descriptions, here is what it says about shield bash:

Shield Bash Attacks: You can bash an opponent with a heavy shield, using it as an off-hand weapon. (Italics added.)

That is right, it states right there that shield bash attacks can only be off hand attacks. That means the shield can't be used as a primary attack with a light weapon in the secondary hand to reduce TWF penalties to -2/-2. Even with the feat Shield Master, the primary attack is always going to suffer a penalty.

So I hope I helped here. I trust you are a good GM, and thus will make a good ruling on the issue you found with Bashing and Shield Spikes. I know, as a GM and Player, that it isn't much fun when something overpowered puts a player in the spotlight more then the other ones. It makes the game feel like it is all about them. You were right to voice your objection, and I think there is enough helpful advice in this thread to help you overcome it.

Anything usable in the off hand is usable in the primary hand.

Note it does not say "You can't make Shield Bash attacks with a shield in your primary hand."

It says you can slam them with the shield IF you are using it in the off-hand. There's no 'restriction' wording there.

This has been noted by the devs multiple times. It's not a valid argument. You can most certainly wield your shield as your main weapon. If not, I suggest you go talk to Captain America and tell him he's doing it wrong.

==Aelryinth

I apologize, I will have to go see what exactly the devs have noted multiple times. Maybe you can help me with a few links.

You are right, wording is not exclusive. But until I can find more on what the developers have said, I will go with By RAW the answer is no - when describing Shield Bash it specifically mentions using a shield as an offhand attack, meanwhile the Two Weapon Fighting Combat rules state you only reduce penalties by 2 if you wield a light weapon in your off hand..

I know in that same link there are other opinions and interpretations of this conundrum, but I am a stickler and tend to interpret things in my own literal way.

As for Captain America, he only uses a shield as a weapon, which is a different matter (I am of the opinion that if the only attack is an offhand attack, it counts as a primary.) He is also part of the comic book universe not the pathfinder game. As far as I am concerned the game and comic books are mutually exclusive. If they were not, I could play Wolverine, and you don't want me to play Wolverine.

you are being obtuse.

Any weapon that can be wielded in the offhand can be wielded in the primary. That's just common sense.

The rule for Sheild Bashing is that even though Shields are wielded in the off hand, they get the benefit. By default, they would automatically if wielded in the primary.

So, don't claim RAW. RAI is fine, and if that's they way you want to play it, it's your game. But it's not RAW.

==Aelryinth

I am sorry, as I am trying to keep this civil, but please don't insult me. I didn't find the comment about me being obtuse very nice, and it really doesn't help your post.

Okay, so I know the RAI on shield bashing, you don't have to explain it twice. However, I have not seen anything yet that the developers have said that gives us the RAI. If you can help me with some links I can then be better informed and make a decision on if I want to follow RAW or RAI.

Doing a search isn't always helpful, as there are tons of posts on any given subject. I am still going to do one though, I would just appreciate some direction.

As for taking a non-developer's word for the RAI, its my personal belief that you should base your decisions on the source of information, not those quoting or interpreting it. You can tell me what the RAI is, but until I can find a developers word and read it myself, I really want to stick with RAW. Sorry if you feel that "obtuse" or wrong. Its just the way I am.

also, I really don't want to make this a RAW vs. RAI vs. Rule 0 debate. I actually use all three in my games and playing, and I believe I suggested one of each in my post above. Can we just agree to disagree and leave it at that? (along with some links to what the Devs said about shield bashing because I would love those.)

You cannot dual wield shields.

Why, again?

You can dual wield shields it is just that the typed "shield" bonus to armor class doesn't stack. So yes you can use two shields and take weapon focus shield, ect...

Also you would have 3 items to enchant for defense armor and left shield right shield , now only one of those shields is going to add to armor so only one needs to be enchanted with +X enhancement bonus but the other is a cheap way to get other mods like fortification and such.

Aelryinth wrote:

You cannot dual wield shields.

Why, again?

There's no written rule against holding two shields, but you definitely wouldn't get AC bonuses from more than one at a time. All shields that can be used to attack (Bucklers can not be used to attack.) are at least medium (one-handed) weapons, the best case scenario for offense would be two one-handed weapons, giving a -4/-4 attack penalty.

So, one shield bonus, two mediocre weapons both with -4 attack penalties.

Also, many GMs just won't let you do it. They usually rule against it for one or more of the following:
It looks dumb.
It's not historically accurate.
It's physically awkward enough to be ineffective.

Light shields are light weapons.

How do you get 2D6 for shield spikes. A heavy spike shield is stated out on the Chart as 1D6 piecing. It's 1D4 blunt with out spikes.

The description says shield spikes make the attacks with the shield piercing and the shield acts as though it was 1 size category larger for damage die. One category larger for 1D4 is 1D6.

Sounds like you are adding the shield damage twice. 1D6 blunt with 1D6 piercing. That's not how you do it. If that were the case then the large shield with spikes would be stated as such on the weapons chart.

Light shields are light weapons.

Huh, I looked that up, and you're right.

How do you get 2D6 for shield spikes. A heavy spike shield is stated out on the Chart as 1D6 piecing. It's 1D4 blunt with out spikes.

The description says shield spikes make the attacks with the shield piercing and the shield acts as though it was 1 size category larger for damage die. One category larger for 1D4 is 1D6.

Sounds like you are adding the shield damage twice. 1D6 blunt with 1D6 piercing. That's not how you do it. If that were the case then the large shield with spikes would be stated as such on the weapons chart.

The bashing property while questionable with spikes adds 2 size categories to the shield for damage purposes making it 2d6

but bashing is blunt and spikes are piercing

but bashing is blunt and spikes are piercing

OK mr obtuse here ya go.

Bashing

Aura Moderate transmutation; CL 8th;

Description
A shield with this special ability is designed to perform a shield bash. A bashing shield deals damage as if it were a weapon of two size categories larger (a Medium light shield thus deals 1d6 points of damage and a Medium heavy shield deals 1d8 points of damage). The shield acts as a +1 weapon when used to bash.

Only light and heavy shields can have this ability.

Construction Requirements
Craft Magic Arms and Armor, bull's strength; Price +1 bonus.

Where does it say only blunt in the shield property?

And because spikes and bashing both increase the effective size is where the "questionable stacking" part of my statement came from.

Aelryinth wrote:

You cannot dual wield shields.

Why, again?

Because from a anatomic point of view it's not possible to wear them effectivly?

I like sword and shield fighting much, it's stylish (see e.g. Dragon Age), but all these "two shields", "shield as main hand weapon" or "heavy steel shield + kukri" this are powergaming ideas and odin is my attestor, i would kick everybody who think of this out of my grounp!

@TE: yeah sword&shield fighter are powerful, but i would allow them at my table, as long as they don't go for the stuff above. :)

Pendagast wrote:

but bashing is blunt and spikes are piercing

OK mr obtuse here ya go.

srd wrote:

Bashing

Aura Moderate transmutation; CL 8th;

Description
A shield with this special ability is designed to perform a shield bash. A bashing shield deals damage as if it were a weapon of two size categories larger (a Medium light shield thus deals 1d6 points of damage and a Medium heavy shield deals 1d8 points of damage). The shield acts as a +1 weapon when used to bash.

Only light and heavy shields can have this ability.

Construction Requirements
Craft Magic Arms and Armor, bull's strength; Price +1 bonus.

Where does it say only blunt in the shield property?

And because spikes and bashing both increase the effective size is where the "questionable stacking" part of my statement came from.

That's how it's done. I didn't realize you were talking about magic shield. I was thinking you talking about the bashing property of the shield not the magical property. So 2D6+1 is what a Heavy Spiked Shield of Bashing would be and it would be Piercing. A Heavy Shield of Bashing would be 1D8+1 blunt. Makes sense and seems like pretty good ability for +1 enchantment.

Oh man, I feel like an idiot. After a great night of rest and some time to think about this I realized that Aelryinth was talking about one thing and I was talking about another.

Yes, I did say that two shields shouldn't be wielded at the same time. He came back and countered, very well I might add, that they could. He also pointed out that a shield can be used with the main hand.

And for some reason I was thinking he was talking about wielding a shield in the main and a light weapon in the offhand. He was right, I was obtuse!

So sorry Aelryinth. I clearly missed what you were saying, my bad.

What I thought was being talked about is also a debated topic, but has nothing to do with duel wielding shields.

Yes, there are no rules against duel wielding shields. Doing so wont gain you more shield bonuses to AC, but there wont be anything different in terms of penalties. In fact, if one shield was a light shield and the other was a heavy one, you could have only a -2/-2 for two weapon fighting.

My problem with this type of build though is that there are so many questions that arise with it that it might be abuse-able. For example, would shield master eliminate two-weapon fighting penalties from both shield attacks? If I enchant both of the shields with armor enhancements, like fortification and energy resistance, do the special properties for both shields work together? (not talking about the +x to the shield bonus to AC, just the special properties.) What about feats like Shield Slam, do I then have free bullrushes with all of my attacks? should gaining a 2d6 on both primary and offhand attacks be allowed?

I don't see a player asking me if they can do this anytime soon, and I really have no desire myself to play a shield duel wielder. Maybe I will just leave this topic alone and find one that is more relevant to my current games.

I ran on a similar problem while playing with my actuel two-weapon-shield-bashing fighter. Not knowing at the time how the damages where calculated, I had to look more precisely how the Attack property worked.
The following quote is the french equivalent of what Dragonsong just posted, so it's the "Attack" property description.

Attaque.

Cette propriété ne peut être placée que sur un écu ou une rondache. Un bouclier d’attaque est conçu pour porter des coups de bouclier, et il inflige des dégâts correspondant à un bouclier de deux catégories de taille supérieures à sa taille réelle. (Par exemple, un écu de taille M inflige alors 1d8 points de dégâts et une rondache de taille M 1d6 points de dégâts.) Un bouclier d’attaque confère un bonus de +1 sur les jets d’attaque et de dégâts quand on l’utilise pour attaquer, et il compte comme une arme magique.

A light shield does 1d3 damage on bash.

Nowhere in the description of the Attack property these stats appears, so I understood that "two categories larger" didn't mean "Sir, you just got a Very Huge Heavy shield to beat other to pulp with", but than the weapons just gets to improve it's damages as if it were a weapon with two more lines in the "Table: Tiny and Large Weapon Damage".
1d3 -> 1d4 -> 1d6.
1d4 -> 1d6 -> 1d8.

Wait, 1d6, 1d8 ? Bingo.
It was then decided than getting spikes on the shield worked like improving once more the dice from the weapon. An Attack spiked Light shield 1d6 becomes 1d8, and an Attack spiked Heavy shield 1d8 becomes 1d10. Apparently a houserule seeing how we discovered it was officially stated in the forums, but it doesn't break the game at all considering the price in money, feats and attack penalties in combat.
Whatever the case, if you consider that spiked and "Attack" stack or not, the spikes can be enchanted separately as stated in the rules, but as a GM, never forget that the Attack property makes the shield work like a +1 weapon. So, it's possible to get a "+2 Attack Shield, +1 Spiked", but the +1 or masterwork state of the spikes don't stack with the Attack property that already gives a +1 enhancement bonus to attacks made with the shield. If your player wants to improve it's shield attack, it's a cost of 8000gp to gain an additional +1 by obtaining at least +2 spikes, 2000gp from it which are essentially useless !
I'm level 8, got 4 attacks including two off-hand at (+15/+10)/(+15/+10) = 1d8+8 with a +2 Long Sword, and 1d8+10 with an off-hand +1 Attack Light Shield, masterwork spiked.
29/13/26 AC, and even with a GM prone to give us what we need but never over the average wealth per level, it's hard to improve this kind of fighting style, even more when one of the weapons is a spiked attack light shield.

Tl;dr -> It's 1d6 for light Attack shield, 1d8 for heavy Attack shield, respectively 1d8 and 1d10 if you chose to let the spikes stack, always less game-breaking than the "2d6" I see way too often when someone evokes the Attack Heavy shield.
Spikes are enchantable on their own, but their enhancement doesn't stack with the Attack property from the shield, so to get an additional +1 on a Attack shield which is already considered a +1 weapon, it's minimum +2 spikes or stfu and gtfo.
Hope this helps !

Thanks for the input guys.

I've decided to let the player in question stack his shield die damage with spikes and bashing ability. Its in the game, I don't necessarily agree with it but there you go.

But to the point of S/B being superior to 2 WF I am still not convinced this is not the case. Taking a historical view and applying it in game terms. A Main Gauche duelist will have to "double up" his feats with Rapier and Dagger (Main Gauche)much like the Sword and Board player in order to gain the same benefits. Now I understand that most 2WF will in all likely hood use the same weapon but I am iterating that a historical style of effective fighting (Main Gauche) has the same game mechanic weakness that Sword and Board has in that the feats requirements is much greater.

Now I am willing to accede that a Duel Wielding Falcata fighter will probably out DPR a Sword and Board player but what about all the other styles out there like Main Gauche or Axe and Spear or Sword and Hammer etc. I am still stuck on the idea that the feat Improved Shield Bash has a distinct advantage in that you can basically take a defensive item and make a rather effective weapon out of it without any deleterious affects. I have never had a player in any group I have played in go this route (Sword and Board) it seems most players want to be Drizzt, but this route seem very effective almost too effective...

I am thinking of using a parry mechanic a'la Kevin Siembieda's Palladium System and doing away with Shield bonus to AC all together. Does anyone have a link or know of one that is already in use (house rule)?

I recommend that if you want to do look at the duelist parry ability and possibly choose it as a standing rule for everyone.

I would recommend that some one with a shield should get a "free" parry every round, heavy shield 2, and a tower shield 3, while the buckler doesn't get a free block. The shields could offer their current shield bonus as a bonus on the parry attempt.

Shield bashing would take away your free block attempts but your regular attacks could be traded for parries as normal.

You can take a defensive weapon and make it a pretty good weapon yup- but a fighter who does this must spend more feats to make it viable so theres a trade off..

Perhaps someone can suggest a good parry mechanic, but from experience i've rarely seen it work or look like it will work- the systems just not built for it.