i made a summoner.. and would really like to have alot of ac.. i was just wondering.. could i use 2 shields?? at a time?? i thought of using a buckler in one hand. so ican still cast spells.. and instead of a weapon in the other.. hand could i use say a light spiked shield??? possibly taking some feats for shield fighting??? or is there a rule against more then one shield??? just a thought??
there are no rules keeping you from weilding two sheilds, you can even fight with them but you only gain the shiled bonus from one shield, using two shileds does not increase your AC
Using two shields would be using the same type of bonus twice. It does not stack. If you use your hand for anything other than carrying a shield you do not get the AC bonus from that shield for that round.
what about enhancements?? on the shield?? would they both work?? say ?? say one shield had spell resistance and the other had deflect arrows?? would both propertys still work??
It's worth noting that if you spend a standard action to use a Tower Shield as cover, you still retain any AC bonuses from a second shield (cover provides a +4 bonus to AC, while your primary shield can provide its shield bonus to AC). This does, however, mean you'll basically be doing nothing for a round.
what about enhancements?? on the shield?? would they both work?? say ?? say one shield had spell resistance and the other had deflect arrows?? would both propertys still work??
Yes, as long as you were wielding both, both effects would work. If, however, you cast a spell, you would no longer be wielding with the buckler.
Just like if you use the buckler hand to attack with a weapon you no longer get the shield bonus.
what about enhancements?? on the shield?? would they both work?? say ?? say one shield had spell resistance and the other had deflect arrows?? would both propertys still work??
I would rule no, they would not both work. If you can not benefit from the combined AC of using two shields then you can not benefit from the magical enhancements of both shields in regards to defensive abilities. Now if they were magical enhancements geared for offense, such as a +1 to hit and damage, then maybe. At least that is my two coppers worth.
what about enhancements?? on the shield?? would they both work?? say ?? say one shield had spell resistance and the other had deflect arrows?? would both propertys still work??
I would follow the rules regarding stacking armor. The item with the higher bonus overrides all function of the other including enhancements. So no. you wouldn't get anything from trying to cheese two shields.
what about enhancements?? on the shield?? would they both work?? say ?? say one shield had spell resistance and the other had deflect arrows?? would both propertys still work??
I would rule no, they would not both work. If you can not benefit from the combined AC of using two shields then you can not benefit from the magical enhancements of both shields in regards to defensive abilities. Now if they were magical enhancements geared for offense, such as a +1 to hit and damage, then maybe. At least that is my two coppers worth.
But those would be separate enchants for weapon qualities. You can't use a shield's defensive enhancement bonus for attacks, you have to enchant the shield separately as a weapon. IIRC. I just got off work. Tired.
what about enhancements?? on the shield?? would they both work?? say ?? say one shield had spell resistance and the other had deflect arrows?? would both propertys still work??
Yes, because they are not enhancement bonuses and thus can stack. This means if you wanted to wield two shields (say a pair of heavy shields), one could be a +5 bashing shield, and the other could be a +1 reflective arrow catching shield. They could also both be enchanted as weapons, and could be dual-wielded with the appropriate feats. If dual-wielding isn't for you, then perhaps consider making one shield a +5 defending weapon, and your other shield a +5 weapon which you actually fight with.
If dual-wielding isn't for you, then perhaps consider making one shield a +5 defending weapon, and your other shield a +5 weapon which you actually fight with.
Lucky for all of us the FAQ on defending has clarified you must attack with the defending weapon to gain it's defensive boost.
Well then that's a recent change, as it wasn't like that in 3.x, and that's not what it says in my copy of the book. Then again I don't pay very much attention to a lot of the FAQs, because they have a tendency to be weird or even wrong (speaking in regards to "The Sage" for the 3.5 FAQ as well, not just Paizo).
However! If applying FAQs to the thread, merely ignore the defending properly entirely, and don't waste money raising your other shield to a +5 weapon. Instead stack special abilities. With about the same cost investment it would take to make it a +5 defending shield (72,000 gp), you could instead get it enchanted to be a +1 arrow deflecting shield of heavy fortification with 10 points energy resistance in 2 energy types (such as Fire and Acid) for 85,000 gp. Or just 1 energy resistance at 67,000 gp. You can still even get it made into a +5 magic item (weapon side) so that it's effectively sunder-proof by most foes.
Truthfully, this is a much stronger option than using Defending.
If dual-wielding isn't for you, then perhaps consider making one shield a +5 defending weapon, and your other shield a +5 weapon which you actually fight with.
Lucky for all of us the FAQ on defending has clarified you must attack with the defending weapon to gain it's defensive boost.
Hah, the days of guys slapping on a +whatever defending gauntlet for a quick and cheap AC boost are gone, eh?
If dual-wielding isn't for you, then perhaps consider making one shield a +5 defending weapon, and your other shield a +5 weapon which you actually fight with.
Lucky for all of us the FAQ on defending has clarified you must attack with the defending weapon to gain it's defensive boost.
Hah, the days of guys slapping on a +whatever defending gauntlet for a quick and cheap AC boost are gone, eh?
Cheap!?
Last I time I checked it was neither quick nor cheap. A +5 defending item costs at least 72,300 gp, minimum. As far as magic items that enhance AC goes, that is an exceptionally pricey premium. It's more expensive than a +5 deflection, or a +5 natural armor bonus, and it is even more expensive than a +8 armor bonus (bracers) or a +14 AC bonus (+5 full-plate, valued at about 26,500 gp or so).
A Defending weapon was there for the guy who wanted to pay a premium to squeeze an extra +25% avoidance onto his AC, instead of having a weapon that is just for killing. With a nerf like this, the weapon is no longer useful for defending, as you will essentially be wasting money on a bad weapon (it doesn't really matter if you're a bit harder to hit if your opponent is also harder to hit).
However, I suppose this is more of a reason to get a lesser cloak of displacement for a 24/7 +20% avoidance and immunity to sneak attack, allows you to use Stealth, and is also priced at about 1/3rd the cost of a +5 defending weapon (20,500 gp, IIRC).
Cheap!?
Last I time I checked it was neither quick nor cheap. A +5 defending item costs at least 72,300 gp, minimum. As far as magic items that enhance AC goes, that is an exceptionally pricey premium. It's more expensive than a +5 deflection, or a +5 natural armor bonus, and it is even more expensive than a +8 armor bonus (bracers) or a +14 AC bonus (+5 full-plate, valued at about 26,500 gp or so).
A Defending weapon was there for the guy who wanted to pay a premium to squeeze an extra +25% avoidance onto his AC, instead of having a weapon that is just for killing. With a nerf like this, the weapon is no longer useful for defending, as you will essentially be wasting money on a bad weapon (it doesn't really matter if you're a bit harder to hit if your opponent is also harder to hit).
However, I suppose this is more of a reason to get a lesser cloak of displacement for a 24/7 +20% avoidance and immunity to sneak attack, allows you to use Stealth, and is also priced at about 1/3rd the cost of a +5 defending weapon (20,500 gp, IIRC).
I still didn't really like it back in 3.5, though. And while you pay half cost for crafting it and 73k gold isn't THAT big a hit to the pocket anyway at really high levels? I meant more cheap in the sense of "really sneaky way to tag on an extra boost to AC". It just always rubbed me the wrong way for some reason, rather than putting it on your primary weapon.
I still didn't really like it back in 3.5, though. And while you pay half cost for crafting it and 73k gold isn't THAT big a hit to the pocket anyway at really high levels? I meant more cheap in the sense of "really sneaky way to tag on an extra boost to AC". It just always rubbed me the wrong way for some reason, rather than putting it on your primary weapon.
Are you familiar with the concept of weapons like the main gauche? You don't use certain enhancements on your main weapon. Some enhancements are situational, or better served as a backup or secondary option. There is no reason you would want to lower your hit and damage on your main weapon to improve your AC, because then you aren't gaining anything (you are spending money to just take less and deal less).
The defending weapon property already requires you to have spent the equivalent of a +6 weapon to get the full benefits, which means as a backup weapon it is amazingly expensive (72,000 gp is pretty expensive no matter what your level, especially since WBL for 20th is 880,000 gp; making it almost 1/11th of your entire wealth, and it's not even your favorite weapon). The only thing that needed to be adjusted on it was noting that multiple defending weapons do not stack.
Complaining because it wasn't a "main offense" weapon enhancement is like complaining that you don't use a main gauche as your primary weapon. It's kind of missing the point.
Now if defending let you apply the enhancement bonus to your AC without losing the +hit/dmg aspect? Then yeah, it would be way worth it. As it is, now it's just another trap option.
EDIT: Likewise, it's already hard to get a truly safe AC at high levels. If you simply went by the HD to CR chart in creating monsters, a CR 20 magical beast is expected to have about 31 HD, which is a +31 base attack alone before ability scores, feats, or buffs. That hits between an AC 33 and 50 on a 2-19.
In a game where people already say that spanking is better than tanking, it's a wonder to me why people seem to cry fowl over +25% attack roll avoidance.
Are you familiar with the concept of weapons like the main gauche? You don't use certain enhancements on your main weapon. Some enhancements are situational, or better served as a backup or secondary option. There is no reason you would want to lower your hit and damage on your main weapon to improve your AC, because then you aren't gaining anything (you are spending money to just take less and deal less).
The defending weapon property already requires you to have spent the equivalent of a +6 weapon to get the full benefits, which means as a backup weapon it is amazingly expensive (72,000 gp is pretty expensive no matter what your level, especially since WBL for 20th is 880,000 gp; making it almost 1/11th of your entire wealth, and it's not even your favorite weapon). The only thing that needed to be adjusted on it was noting that multiple defending weapons do not stack.
Complaining because it wasn't a "main offense" weapon enhancement is like complaining that you don't use a main gauche as your primary weapon. It's kind of missing the point.
Now if defending let you apply the enhancement bonus to your AC without losing the +hit/dmg aspect? Then yeah, it would be way worth it. As it is, now it's just another trap option.
EDIT: Likewise, it's already hard to get a truly safe AC at high levels. If you simply went by the HD to CR chart in creating monsters, a CR 20 magical beast is expected to have about 31 HD, which is a +31 base attack alone before ability scores, feats, or buffs. That hits between an AC 33 and 50 on a 2-19.
In a game where people already say that spanking is better than tanking, it's...
Actually, if it WERE something like a main gauche, or a sai, or something like that, I'd have no problem with it. It's still a weapon, that you have out and are using. The gauntlet trick annoyed me because it wasn't even that. It was basically treating it not as a weapon but rather just an extra +AC item slot, and something about that just bugged the everloving hell out of me for some reason. XD Rational? Maybe not. But that's just how I feel about it. And I think maybe I need to talk to my DMs about the amount of gold we tend to get, because it often exceeded 880k by leaps and bounds o_O;
I'm also not so sure about it being a flat-out trap option, either. If you're fighting something with powerful attacks but relatively poor AC, it's a perfectly useful enchantment even WITH the gimped to-hit. It's saved my sorry ass on a few occasions, anyway. *shrugs* There's better enchantments to have, certainly, but I wouldn't call it a trap option.
Actually, if it WERE something like a main gauche, or a sai, or something like that, I'd have no problem with it. It's still a weapon, that you have out and are using. The gauntlet trick annoyed me because it wasn't even that. It was basically treating it not as a weapon but rather just an extra +AC item slot, and something about that just bugged the everloving hell out of me for some reason. XD Rational? Maybe not. But that's just how I feel about it. And I think maybe I need to talk to my DMs about the amount of gold we tend to get, because it often exceeded 880k by leaps and bounds o_O;
There are films where characters parry or catch weapons with gauntlets and/or wristbands. Honestly the idea of en enchanted gauntlet that guards you isn't exactly far off, nor would a magical shield that would magically deflect incoming attacks, or even spikes on your armor that seemingly come to life and catch blades like gnashing teeth. You're spending at least 72,300 gp plus the cost of a gauntlet (armor doesn't come with mwk gauntlets) to get upwards to +5 to your AC.
It is very possible that your GMs are exceptionally heavy with treasure, as it's not terribly uncommon. Monte Haul games have been around for longer than I can remember, and even without being a Monte Haul you can end up with a lot more if your GM makes it so. I was commenting on the expected wealth by 20th level, and the standard is about 880,000 gp, so being close to 80,000 gp makes it a little less than 1/11th of your wealth, which is before counting your main weapon (at least another 50,000 gp for a +5 with no abilities), your armor, protective items (natural, deflection, armor, displacement, resistances, etc). Then you've got to get your stat boosters, some utility items, and if you don't plan to be dead some movement items (flying, teleporting, freedom of movement) and ward items (protection from evil, deathward, etc).
Example of AC scaling.
Fighter geared out.
Dexterity +7 (assuming 14 + 6 magic item + 4 inherent modifier)
+5 Mithril Full Plate +14
+5 Mithril Heavy Shield +7
+5 Ring of Protection +5
+5 Amulet of Natural Armor +5
10 Base AC
Total = 48 and that's with a shield. Without a shield the total drops to 41. This is also a FIGHTER wearing the best armor he can and using his class features to pump the max-dex of his armor up as well.
That CR 20 magical beast before? Yeah it has a +31 BAB before factoring in stuff like strength modifiers, feats, or circumstantial bonuses like flanking or buffs ('cause monsters can get buffed too y'know). That means the monster has merely a +7 higher (a modest 24 strength) it hits us on a 10. That's a 55% chance. Without the shield? On a 3. Against anyone without the heavy armor and super dexterity? On a 2 with every attack.
Do you really think there was a mechanical need here?
EDIT: Even with Combat Expertise (+6) and a defending weapon (+5), the creature still hits the guy without a shield on a 14, and most others on less than a 10. The only guy he would actually have great difficulty hitting pre-buffs would be the guy who's wielding a +5 heavy shield on top of all of it, and frankly if that guy doesn't have a right to be nigh unhittable by unbuffed enemies, then I don't know who is.
I keep seeing how everyone says that shield bonus does not stack, sighting the rules of stacking. I challenge that preconceived notion. I wish to state my case, and it to be judge on its merits, not dogma.
The rule used for denying stacking shield bonus is this one:
"Each type of armor grants an armor bonus to Armor Class, while shields grant a shield bonus to Armor Class. The armor bonus from a suit of armor doesn't stack with other effects or items that grant an armor bonus. Similarly, the shield bonus from a shield doesn't stack with other effects that grant a shield bonus."
The logic is simple, Armor bonus don’t stack, shield bonus don’t stack.
I say that is incorrect, and here is my argument as to why shields do stack.
It says that for suits of armor, “...doesn't stack with OTHER EFFECTS...(i.e. non physical armor bonus such as spells) or items (physical items)THAT grant armor bonus.”
In practical use: You cannot wear a suit of armor and bracers of defense and gain both bonuses. And you can’t wear two suits of armor, say padded inside full plate, and combine bonuses.
However, for shields, it says “Similarly, the shield bonus from a shield doesn't stack with other effects that grant a shield bonus." Please note that it does not say items as it does for armor. In this case “similarly” refers to the stacking effects and not the source. Two shields are not providing two “other” (different) effects granting the same bonus, they are the same item granting the same effect. And unlike armor, which specifically prevents items from stacking, shields have no restriction because it does not mentioned items; hence the use of the word “similar”. You can use two shields unlike two armors.
In practical use: you cannot stack the shield bonus from bucklers and the bonus from two-weapon defense, because they are both shield bonus from different,"other", sources. But you can stack the bonus from two shields.
In addition, I’ll go one further; in the event of a character obtaining a wish (something my DM never hands out), that character could conceivably wish for two sets of arms. One set for dual wielding, and one set for dual shielding.
what about enhancements?? on the shield?? would they both work?? say ?? say one shield had spell resistance and the other had deflect arrows?? would both propertys still work??
As per the rules regarding armor stacking, only the active shield would work.
I keep seeing how everyone says that shield bonus does not stack, sighting the rules of stacking. I challenge that preconceived notion.
Challenge it all you like. The rules are quite simple. With the exception of dodge, and untyped bonuses, bonuses of the same type do not stack, simple, period, end of story. You want redress from that rule, ask your GM. If you're playing PFS, the book is closed on this matter.
It provides no additional bonus (though I'd say you would get the enhancements--the bonuses don't stack, but they're still there. Ask your GM!). It does, however, look kinda awesome.
It provides no additional bonus (though I'd say you would get the enhancements--the bonuses don't stack, but they're still there. Ask your GM!). It does, however, look kinda awesome.
The rules for armor and shield bonus stacking are not simple. If the rule(s) said, "you cannot stack shield or armor bonus." Then ya, it would be simple; but it doesn't. The rules give two conditions for what sources the stacking come from, one for armor and one for shield, and while they are similar, they are not the same, and that is my point. Also, I will challenge every face value, especially when it’s a closed book.
I keep seeing how everyone says that shield bonus does not stack, sighting the rules of stacking. I challenge that preconceived notion.
Challenge it all you like. The rules are quite simple. With the exception of dodge, and untyped bonuses, bonuses of the same type do not stack, simple, period, end of story. You want redress from that rule, ask your GM. If you're playing PFS, the book is closed on this matter.
It provides no additional bonus (though I'd say you would get the enhancements--the bonuses don't stack, but they're still there. Ask your GM!). It does, however, look kinda awesome.
The rules for armor and shield bonus stacking are not simple. If the rule(s) said, "you cannot stack shield or armor bonus." Then ya, it would be simple; but it doesn't. The rules give two conditions for what sources the stacking come from, one for armor and one for shield, and while they are similar, they are not the same, and that is my point. Also, I will challenge every face value, especially when it’s a closed book.
The general rule is that two bonuses of the same type don't stack. Shields give a shield bonus to armor class, you can not stack two shield bonuses. And again like many would be munchkins you forget another basic principle, the rules aren't about what you can't do, they are about what you're allowed to do. You have to find a specific rule that contravenes the general rule of stacking bonuses if you want to stack the protection power of two shields.
The search feature is your friend. There are lots and lots of threads on dual shielding. Search for them and read them. They will answer the vast majority of your questions.
It provides no additional bonus (though I'd say you would get the enhancements--the bonuses don't stack, but they're still there. Ask your GM!). It does, however, look kinda awesome.
The rules for armor and shield bonus stacking are not simple. If the rule(s) said, "you cannot stack shield or armor bonus." Then ya, it would be simple; but it doesn't. The rules give two conditions for what sources the stacking come from, one for armor and one for shield, and while they are similar, they are not the same, and that is my point. Also, I will challenge every face value, especially when it’s a closed book.
The general rule is that two bonuses of the same type don't stack. Shields give a shield bonus to armor class, you can not stack two shield bonuses. And again like many would be munchkins you forget another basic principle, the rules aren't about what you can't do, they are about what you're allowed to do. You have to find a specific rule that contravenes the general rule of stacking bonuses if you want to stack the protection power of two shields.
You are incorrect sir, according to the rules, the shield bonus does not stack with OTHER effects that grant a shield bonus. Please explain "...Other effects that Grant..." You see, a second shield does not grant an "Other effect"... it grants the same effect. Which, may seem like spliting hairs, execpt that,in reference to Armor, it actually states that you can't stack bonus from "ITEMS".
The search feature is your friend. There are lots and lots of threads on dual shielding. Search for them and read them. They will answer the vast majority of your questions.
I have, and still, are reading the threads. All the arguments against two shields, seem to be just one argument, and that is the base rule of bonus stacking, as applied to shields and armor. I'm re-asking the question in the context/frame of the difference in which the rules talk about the bonus, in specific, for armor and shield separate. I feel that the rules don't say, that you can't stack bonus from two shields, which they clearly spell out you can't do for armor, that you just can't stack two different shield effects.
But I will keep searching the threadsl; as you suggested.
It provides no additional bonus (though I'd say you would get the enhancements--the bonuses don't stack, but they're still there. Ask your GM!). It does, however, look kinda awesome.
The rules for armor and shield bonus stacking are not simple. If the rule(s) said, "you cannot stack shield or armor bonus." Then ya, it would be simple; but it doesn't. The rules give two conditions for what sources the stacking come from, one for armor and one for shield, and while they are similar, they are not the same, and that is my point. Also, I will challenge every face value, especially when it’s a closed book.
The general rule is that two bonuses of the same type don't stack. Shields give a shield bonus to armor class, you can not stack two shield bonuses. And again like many would be munchkins you forget another basic principle, the rules aren't about what you can't do, they are about what you're allowed to do. You have to find a specific rule that contravenes the general rule of stacking bonuses if you want to stack the protection power of two shields.
You are incorrect sir, according to the rules, the shield bonus does not stack with OTHER effects that grant a shield bonus. Please explain "...Other effects that Grant..." You see, a second shield does not grant an "Other effect"... it grants the same effect. Which, may seem like spliting hairs, execpt that,in reference to Armor, it actually states that you can't stack bonus from "ITEMS".
Same effects do not stack. You can't cast bull strength on yourself twice, and get two strength boots. You can't wear two sets of armor and get both armor bonuses. Where in tarnation do you see that shields are exempt from this?
i made a summoner.. and would really like to have alot of ac.. i was just wondering.. could i use 2 shields?? at a time?? i thought of using a buckler in one hand. so ican still cast spells.. and instead of a weapon in the other.. hand could i use say a light spiked shield??? possibly taking some feats for shield fighting??? or is there a rule against more then one shield??? just a thought??
Make yourself a Synthesist and become Gelatin Man.
It provides no additional bonus (though I'd say you would get the enhancements--the bonuses don't stack, but they're still there. Ask your GM!). It does, however, look kinda awesome.
The rules for armor and shield bonus stacking are not simple. If the rule(s) said, "you cannot stack shield or armor bonus." Then ya, it would be simple; but it doesn't. The rules give two conditions for what sources the stacking come from, one for armor and one for shield, and while they are similar, they are not the same, and that is my point. Also, I will challenge every face value, especially when it’s a closed book.
The general rule is that two bonuses of the same type don't stack. Shields give a shield bonus to armor class, you can not stack two shield bonuses. And again like many would be munchkins you forget another basic principle, the rules aren't about what you can't do, they are about what you're allowed to do. You have to find a specific rule that contravenes the general rule of stacking bonuses if you want to stack the protection power of two shields.
You are incorrect sir, according to the rules, the shield bonus does not stack with OTHER effects that grant a shield bonus. Please explain "...Other effects that Grant..." You see, a second shield does not grant an "Other effect"... it grants the same effect. Which, may seem like spliting hairs, execpt that,in reference to Armor, it actually states that you can't stack bonus from "ITEMS".
Same effects do not stack. You can't cast bull strength on yourself twice, and get two strength boots. You can't wear two sets of armor and get both armor bonuses. Where in tarnation do you see that shields are exempt from this?
I'll tell you where I see it. "The armor bonus from a suit of armor doesn't stack with other effects or items that grant an armor bonus." It specifically says ITEMS for armor. But under shield bonus, it DOES NOT SAY items, only effect. Do you not see that?
Here is the General Rule of Bonus stacking, since it has not been quoted yet.
Bonus
Bonuses are numerical values that are added to checks and statistical scores. Most bonuses have a type, and as a general rule, bonuses of the same type are not cumulative (do not “stack”)—only the greater bonus granted applies.
The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don't generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus of a given type works. Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.
Now quote to me the rule that says sheilds are specifically exempted from this general rule. Otherwise, ask your GM to give you an exception. If you manage either of these you're good.
A shield provides a shield bonus to AC. Wielding two shields provides two different sources of a bonus, but in both cases those are shield bonuses, and therefore do not stack. The same would be true if you had two separate magical items - say, an ioun stone and wrist bands - that (for some reason) provided shield bonuses to AC; they're separate items granting separate bonuses, but the bonuses are of the same type, and therefore would not stack. That's the reason you gain no benefit from wearing bracers of armor if you're wearing a suit of armor that grants a better AC.
To respond to an earlier question in this very necro'd thread: Magic items provide their benefit upon use. Based on the ruling that the Defending property on a weapon triggers when you attack with it, a magical property on a piece of armor would only trigger if you were using it in the method it designed. Thus I'd argue since you can only 'use' one shield at a time to benefit your AC, you'd gain no benefit from the defensive properties on the second shield.
Here is the General Rule of Bonus stacking, since it has not been quoted yet.
Bonus
Bonuses are numerical values that are added to checks and statistical scores. Most bonuses have a type, and as a general rule, bonuses of the same type are not cumulative (do not “stack”)—only the greater bonus granted applies.
The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don't generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus of a given type works. Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.
Now quote to me the rule that says sheilds are specifically exempted from this general rule. Otherwise, ask your GM to give you an exception. If you manage either of these you're good.
I will concede that there is no rule that rises to the level of the absolute statement you seem to require. That being said, using your own choice of source material, I will try to do the next best thing, which is demostrate how the rule does indeed allow it.
Under Armor, it says items or effect. Do not all items produce an effect, whether it's magical or not? The answer is yes, and that effect is the Armor bonus. So why say both then, item and effect? That's because, effect is refering to the type of bonus and item is refering to the...well the item. So you can't put padding under full plate, specifically because THE items are producing the same effect.
Whereas shield not only leaves out the disqualifing "item", it goes on to say "Other" shield effect. Not shield effect, but OTHER shield effects. Which I read as something "other" than itself.
I don't see the exclusion of a single word as being 'specific' enough to override what's effectively one of the core balancing rules of the game, really.
To me, it seems more likely that the designers just never really expected the corner case of 'dual wield shields' to come up. After all, it's not a widely-used fighting style, in reality or in fiction; you see historical battles where the shield is used as as an off-hand weapon, and you see books, movies, and comics where you even find people using a shield as a primary weapon, but I can't think of any case off the top of my head where someone fights with two shields.
Just to point out how potentially broken this could be balance-wise: A kasatha (a naturally four-armed race) could wield four +5 heavy shields, and his shields alone would be granting him +21 to his AC.
I don't see the exclusion of a single word as being 'specific' enough to override what's effectively one of the core balancing rules of the game, really.
To me, it seems more likely that the designers just never really expected the corner case of 'dual wield shields' to come up. After all, it's not a widely-used fighting style, in reality or in fiction; you see historical battles where the shield is used as as an off-hand weapon, and you see books, movies, and comics where you even find people using a shield as a primary weapon, but I can't think of any case off the top of my head where someone fights with two shields.
Just to point out how potentially broken this could be balance-wise: A kasatha (a naturally four-armed race) could wield four +5 heavy shields, and his shields alone would be granting him +21 to his AC.
And I agree with your example, infact, I cited a four armed character in one of my example. but just so we are clear. I think your example proves my point, rather than your point of metagaming. Sure, they could wield four shields, but that's all they could do. In the case of a 1st level character, he could have an AC of 27... but that's all he would have, no attack what so ever. That would be akin to a 1st level fighter taking TWF and Power Attack....which would be fine, if he could hit anything.
I don't see the exclusion of a single word as being 'specific' enough to override what's effectively one of the core balancing rules of the game, really.
To me, it seems more likely that the designers just never really expected the corner case of 'dual wield shields' to come up. After all, it's not a widely-used fighting style, in reality or in fiction; you see historical battles where the shield is used as as an off-hand weapon, and you see books, movies, and comics where you even find people using a shield as a primary weapon, but I can't think of any case off the top of my head where someone fights with two shields.
Just to point out how potentially broken this could be balance-wise: A kasatha (a naturally four-armed race) could wield four +5 heavy shields, and his shields alone would be granting him +21 to his AC.
And I agree with your example, infact, I cited a four armed character in one of my example. but just so we are clear. I think your example proves my point, rather than your point of metagaming. Sure, they could wield four shields, but that's all they could do. In the case of a 1st level character, he could have an AC of 27... but that's all he would have, no attack what so ever. That would be akin to a 1st level fighter taking TWF and Power Attack....which would be fine, if he could hit anything.
Just so you know, I'm a player, all I'm looking to do is make a dual wielding shield cleric....no attacking. I'm not looking to unblance a game...
Here is the General Rule of Bonus stacking, since it has not been quoted yet.
Bonus
Bonuses are numerical values that are added to checks and statistical scores. Most bonuses have a type, and as a general rule, bonuses of the same type are not cumulative (do not “stack”)—only the greater bonus granted applies.
The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don't generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus of a given type works. Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.
Now quote to me the rule that says sheilds are specifically exempted from this general rule. Otherwise, ask your GM to give you an exception. If you manage either of these you're good.
I will concede that there is no rule that rises to the level of the absolute statement you seem to require. That being said, using your own choice of source material, I will try to do the next best thing, which is demostrate how the rule does indeed allow it.
Under Armor, it says items or effect. Do not all items produce an effect, whether it's magical or not? The answer is yes, and that effect is the Armor bonus. So why say both then, item and effect? That's because, effect is refering to the type of bonus and item is refering to the...well the item. So you can't put padding under full plate, specifically because THE items are producing the same effect.
Whereas shield not only leaves out the disqualifing "item", it goes on to say "Other" shield effect. Not shield effect, but OTHER shield effects. Which I read as something "other" than itself.
I'm not going to try to follow your reasoning all the way through but I will finish it since you stopped short. And both of these so-called effects produce what? A shield bonus, which still leaves you with the problem of two bonuses of the same type that can not stack. Effects don't grant you AC, it's the bonuses they produce. If one effect yields a shield bonus, and another effect yields a shield bonus, that they are two different effects is irrelevant. It's the ending bonuses that do not stack. What type of bonus is shield B going to be yielding that it's not the same TYPE as the shield bonus of shield A?
What is a "shield effect" as defined in the game in regards to AC other than a shield bonus to AC?
And I will say this again as it needs to be emphasized. If you can get your GM to say YES on this, that's all you need no matter what the rules say.
I don't see the exclusion of a single word as being 'specific' enough to override what's effectively one of the core balancing rules of the game, really.
To me, it seems more likely that the designers just never really expected the corner case of 'dual wield shields' to come up. After all, it's not a widely-used fighting style, in reality or in fiction; you see historical battles where the shield is used as as an off-hand weapon, and you see books, movies, and comics where you even find people using a shield as a primary weapon, but I can't think of any case off the top of my head where someone fights with two shields.
Just to point out how potentially broken this could be balance-wise: A kasatha (a naturally four-armed race) could wield four +5 heavy shields, and his shields alone would be granting him +21 to his AC.
And one last point, before I accepth the guillotine of rule's judgement. It's not just the conspicous absense of the word "item" that I base my little loop hole on, but also the words "similar' and "other". I will admit that had only two of the three elements been present, I could not make a good case. But they do, and with in close proximity of each other. Now, let the blade fall.
And I agree with your example, infact, I cited a four armed character in one of my example. but just so we are clear. I think your example proves my point, rather than your point of metagaming. Sure, they could wield four shields, but that's all they could do. In the case of a 1st level character, he could have an AC of 27... but that's all he would have, no attack what so ever. That would be akin to a 1st level fighter taking TWF and Power Attack....which would be fine, if he could hit anything.
I went ahead and built this out, actually.
Spoiler:
Kasatha
Kasatha Fighter 1
Medium humanoid (human)
Hero Points 1
Init +1; Senses Perception +0
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 23, touch 13, flat-footed 17 (+5 armor, +5 shield, +1 Dex, +2 dodge)
hp 13 (1d10+3)
Fort +4 (+4 vs. fatigue, exhaustion, running, forced marches, starvation, thirst, and hot or cold environments), Ref +1, Will +0
Defensive Abilities desert runner
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 20 ft., jumper, terrain stride
Melee heavy shield bash +3 (1d4+4) and
. . light shield bash +3 (1d3+2) and
. . light shield bash +3 (1d3+2) and
. . light shield bash +3 (1d3+2)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 18, Dex 13, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 11, Cha 8
Base Atk +1; CMB +5; CMD 18
Feats Improved Shield Bash, Multiweapon Fighting
Skills Languages Common
SQ hero points
Other Gear lamellar (horn) armor, heavy steel shield, light steel shield, light steel shield, light steel shield, 3 gp
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Desert Runner (Ex) +4 to Con checks and Fort saves vs fatigue/exhaustion, or ill effects from running, starvation, and temperature.
Hero Points (1) Hero Points can be spent at any time to grant a variety of bonuses.
Improved Shield Bash You still get your shield bonus while using Shield Bash.
Jumper (Ex) You always are considered to have a running start when jumping.
Terrain Stride (Favored Terrain [Desert]) (Ex) Not slowed by difficult terrain in chosen terrain, unless magically manipulated.
Note that I had to override Hero Lab to let it allow me to add the armor from all the equipped shields. ;)
Now, according to the monster creation guidelines, a CR 1 creature (equivalent to a 1st level roughly) has an AC of 12. That means our friend here is hitting on a 9 or better with his shield bash every round, with 4 attacks per round and retaining his AC.
Granted they aren't the strongest, but still, assuming he hits on 2 of his 4 attacks each round he's dealing a minimum of 7-8 damage per round. On a good round, with all 4 hits, he's dealing a minimum of 14 damage - which equals 'dead' against a 1st level creature.
Compare that to our creature, whose high attack is at a +2, meaning he only hits on a natural 20.
And this isn't even where it starts getting gross because I don't have bashing on any of my shields yet which ups the damage to 1d8 and 1d6 respectively.
[edit1]
If there are discrepancies in the stat block compared to the default kasatha it's because I had to build it out using Hero Lab's race builder; even though I have the ARG for some reason it's not showing up in the list of playable races.
[edit2]
Falone wrote:
Just so you know, I'm a player, all I'm looking to do is make a dual wielding shield cleric....no attacking. I'm not looking to unblance a game...
The problem is that you could attack. The fact that you wouldn't doesn't mean everyone else would follow your lead.
And I agree with your example, infact, I cited a four armed character in one of my example. but just so we are clear. I think your example proves my point, rather than your point of metagaming. Sure, they could wield four shields, but that's all they could do. In the case of a 1st level character, he could have an AC of 27... but that's all he would have, no attack what so ever. That would be akin to a 1st level fighter taking TWF and Power Attack....which would be fine, if he could hit anything.
I went ahead and built this out, actually.
** spoiler omitted **...
I'm not sure I followed your creature creation example.
And I agree with your example, infact, I cited a four armed character in one of my example. but just so we are clear. I think your example proves my point, rather than your point of metagaming. Sure, they could wield four shields, but that's all they could do. In the case of a 1st level character, he could have an AC of 27... but that's all he would have, no attack what so ever. That would be akin to a 1st level fighter taking TWF and Power Attack....which would be fine, if he could hit anything.
I went ahead and built this out, actually.
** spoiler omitted **...
I'm confused, do shields grant extra attacks? How does a 1st level get four attacks?
And I agree with your example, infact, I cited a four armed character in one of my example. but just so we are clear. I think your example proves my point, rather than your point of metagaming. Sure, they could wield four shields, but that's all they could do. In the case of a 1st level character, he could have an AC of 27... but that's all he would have, no attack what so ever. That would be akin to a 1st level fighter taking TWF and Power Attack....which would be fine, if he could hit anything.
I went ahead and built this out, actually.
** spoiler omitted **...
I'm not sure I followed your creature creation example.
I built a 1st level Kasatha (a naturally four-armed race) Fighter and then outfitted him with a heavy steel shield and 3 light steel shields. Kasatha have a racial feature called Multiarmed which allows them to wield weapons in all four hands, and attack with all four hands in one round.
Shields can be used as weapons to perform shield bash attacks. I took Multiweapon Fighting (requires DEX 13 and 3 or more hands that can make attacks) so that I could attack with weapons in each hand at only a -2 penalty per attack (light shields count as light weapons when used to perform shield bashes). I also took Improved Shield Bash so that I don't lose my shield bonus to AC for bashing with the shield (which is what normally happens).
Doing so (and with racial dodge bonus and horn armor included) netted me a 23 AC and the ability to make 4 shield bash attacks per round, each at a +3 bonus to attack dealing 1d4+4 or 1d3+2 respectively.
Here is the General Rule of Bonus stacking, since it has not been quoted yet.
Bonus
Bonuses are numerical values that are added to checks and statistical scores. Most bonuses have a type, and as a general rule, bonuses of the same type are not cumulative (do not “stack”)—only the greater bonus granted applies.
The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don't generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus of a given type works. Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.
Now quote to me the rule that says sheilds are specifically exempted from this general rule. Otherwise, ask your GM to give you an exception. If you manage either of these you're good.
I will concede that there is no rule that rises to the level of the absolute statement you seem to require. That being said, using your own choice of source material, I will try to do the next best thing, which is demostrate how the rule does indeed allow it.
Under Armor, it says items or effect. Do not all items produce an effect, whether it's magical or not? The answer is yes, and that effect is the Armor bonus. So why say both then, item and effect? That's because, effect is refering to the type of bonus and item is refering to the...well the item. So you can't put padding under full plate, specifically because THE items are producing the same effect.
Whereas shield not only leaves out the disqualifing "item", it goes on to say "Other" shield effect. Not shield effect, but OTHER shield effects. Which I read as something "other" than itself.
I'm not going to try to follow your reasoning all the way through but I will finish it since you stopped short. And both of these so-called effects produce what? A shield bonus, which still leaves you with the problem of two bonuses of the same type that can not stack....
It's OK if you don't follow my reasoning, you listen my case, although I'm a bit dismayed that you didn't follow the reason all the way through. change is sometime hard. But thatnks for weighing in, at least you heard the argument.
And I agree with your example, infact, I cited a four armed character in one of my example. but just so we are clear. I think your example proves my point, rather than your point of metagaming. Sure, they could wield four shields, but that's all they could do. In the case of a 1st level character, he could have an AC of 27... but that's all he would have, no attack what so ever. That would be akin to a 1st level fighter taking TWF and Power Attack....which would be fine, if he could hit anything.
I went ahead and built this out, actually.
** spoiler omitted **...
I'm not sure I followed your creature creation example.
I built a 1st level Kasatha (a naturally four-armed race) Fighter and then outfitted him with a heavy steel shield and 3 light steel shields. Kasatha have a racial feature called Multiarmed which allows them to wield weapons in all four hands, and attack with all four hands in one round.
Shields can be used as weapons to perform shield bash attacks. I took Multiweapon Fighting (requires DEX 13 and 3 or more hands that can make attacks) so that I could attack with weapons in each hand at only a -2 penalty per attack (light shields count as light weapons when used to perform shield bashes). I also took Improved Shield Bash so that I don't lose my shield bonus to AC for bashing with the shield (which is what normally happens).
Doing so (and with racial dodge bonus and horn armor included) netted me a 23 AC and the ability to make 4 shield bash attacks per round, each at a +3 bonus to attack dealing 1d4+4 or 1d3+2 respectively.
Just a quick question. Isn't a shield bash an off-hand attack, which by definition -10 to hit, -4 with the TWF feat?
And I agree with your example, infact, I cited a four armed character in one of my example. but just so we are clear. I think your example proves my point, rather than your point of metagaming. Sure, they could wield four shields, but that's all they could do. In the case of a 1st level character, he could have an AC of 27... but that's all he would have, no attack what so ever. That would be akin to a 1st level fighter taking TWF and Power Attack....which would be fine, if he could hit anything.
I went ahead and built this out, actually.
** spoiler omitted **...
I'm not sure I followed your creature creation example.
I built a 1st level Kasatha (a naturally four-armed race) Fighter and then outfitted him with a heavy steel shield and 3 light steel shields. Kasatha have a racial feature called Multiarmed which allows them to wield weapons in all four hands, and attack with all four hands in one round.
Shields can be used as weapons to perform shield bash attacks. I took Multiweapon Fighting (requires DEX 13 and 3 or more hands that can make attacks) so that I could attack with weapons in each hand at only a -2 penalty per attack (light shields count as light weapons when used to perform shield bashes). I also took Improved Shield Bash so that I don't lose my shield bonus to AC for bashing with the shield (which is what normally happens).
Doing so (and with racial dodge bonus and horn armor included) netted me a 23 AC and the ability to make 4 shield bash attacks per round, each at a +3 bonus to attack dealing 1d4+4 or 1d3+2 respectively.
Just a quick question. Isn't a shield bash an off-hand attack, which by definition -10 to hit, -4 with the TWF feat?
And that's with a light shield, is it not? And if so, doesn't that kinda bring it more inline with the game than out of it?
Just a quick question. Isn't a shield bash an off-hand attack, which by definition -10 to hit, -4 with the TWF feat?
And that's with a light shield, is it not? And if so, doesn't that kinda bring it more inline with the game than out of it?
It's with one heavy shield and 3 light shields. A shield bash with a heavy shield is considered a one-handed weapon (regardless of whether it's primary or off-hand); a shield bash with a light shield is considered a light weapon (again, regardless of main or off-hand).
TWF normally is -6\-10 if you're wielding two one-handed weapons. If you're wielding a one-handed and a light off-hand it's -4\-8. With TWF it reduces it to -2\-2 (reduces main hand penalty by 2 and off-hand penalty by 6).
MWF works just like TWF save that it affects all off-hands. So with one heavy shield and 3 light shields, it means your penalties are -2\-2\-2\-2. With a STR bonus of +4 and a +1 BAB from being a Fighter, that means all attacks are at a +3 to hit.
Just for fun, I leveled this guy to 11 (as that's when he can get Shield Mastery, and where it becomes uber-gross).
Spoiler:
Kasatha
Kasatha Fighter 11
Large humanoid (human)
Hero Points 1
Init +2; Senses Perception -1
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 40, touch 13, flat-footed 27 (+11 armor, +5 shield, +2 Dex, -1 size, +2 natural, +2 dodge)
hp 82 (11d10+32)
Fort +10 (+4 vs. fatigue, exhaustion, running, forced marches, starvation, thirst, and hot or cold environments), Ref +6, Will +3 (+3 vs. fear)
Defensive Abilities bravery +3, desert runner
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft., jumper, terrain stride
Melee heavy shield bash +21/+16/+11 (2d6+11) and
. . light shield bash +21 (1d8+11) and
. . light shield bash +21 (1d8+11) and
. . light shield bash +21 (1d8+11)
Space 10 ft.; Reach 10 ft.
Special Attacks weapon trainings (heavy blades +1, close +2)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 24, Dex 15, Con 15, Int 9, Wis 9, Cha 8
Base Atk +11; CMB +19; CMD 33
Feats Bashing Finish, Double Slice, Greater Weapon Focus (shield, heavy), Greater Weapon Focus (shield, light), Improved Shield Bash, Multiweapon Fighting, Shield Master, Shield Slam, Two-weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus (shield, heavy), Weapon Focus (shield, light), Weapon Specialization (shield, heavy), Weapon Specialization (shield, light)
Skills Languages Common, Polyglot
SQ armor training 3, hero points
Combat Gear potion of enlarge person (20); Other Gear +2 full plate, +2 bashing adamantine light steel shield, +2 bashing adamantine light steel shield, +2 bashing adamantine light steel shield, +3 bashing adamantine heavy steel shield, amulet of natural armor +2, belt of physical might (str & con +2), cloak of resistance +1, handy haversack, 2,303 gp
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Bashing Finish Whenever you score a critical hit with a melee weapon, you can shield bash the same target as a free action.
Bravery +3 (Ex) +3 to Will save vs. Fear
Desert Runner (Ex) +4 to Con checks and Fort saves vs fatigue/exhaustion, or ill effects from running, starvation, and temperature.
Hero Points (1) Hero Points can be spent at any time to grant a variety of bonuses.
Improved Shield Bash You still get your shield bonus while using Shield Bash.
Jumper (Ex) You always are considered to have a running start when jumping.
Shield Master No off-hand penalties for shield bashes, add a shield's enhancement bonus to attack rolls.
Shield Slam Shield Bash attack gives a free bull rush on a hit.
Terrain Stride (-Choose-) (Ex) Not slowed by difficult terrain in chosen terrain, unless magically manipulated.
Weapon Training (Blades, Heavy) +1 (Ex) +1 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Heavy Blades
Weapon Training (Close) +2 (Ex) +2 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Close-in weapons
Hero Lab and the Hero Lab logo are Registered Trademarks of LWD Technology, Inc. Free download at http://www.wolflair.com
Pathfinder® and associated marks and logos are trademarks of Paizo Publishing, LLC®, and are used under license.
Note that most of the time this guy would be fighting enlarged so it ups his damage dice. The only thing I altered manually here in the stat block was his AC, to add in the additional +9 from the other shields.
The average creature AC at 11th is 25, meaning that on his worst attack - the last attack with his big shield - he still hits on a 14 or greater, which isn't horrible. He's almost assuredly going to hit on the primary attack and the three off-hand shield attacks, and it's pretty likely he'll hit on the second primary shield bash as well. So assuming average damage for all those, he's dealing... 55 guaranteed damage from the bonus damage, and around 19 from the shield attacks.
Now, compare that to the average monster: His high attack at that level is +19. He can't even hit our Kasatha unless he rolls a nat 20. Assuming he does, he's incredibly unlikely to crit, so at most he's going to do ~50 damage. Without incredible amounts of luck and back-to-back nat 20s, the healer's already taken care of the Kasatha's damage by the time the monster hits again.
[edit]
Whoops, forget my Gloves of Dueling. So drop the STR\CON belt, get the STR belt only; drop the Amulet down by 1, since that's still only hitting on a natural 20 with the average creature attack roll; chuck a few potions, and now we have this:
Spoiler:
Kasatha
Kasatha Fighter 11
Large humanoid (human)
Hero Points 1
Init +2; Senses Perception -1
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 39, touch 13, flat-footed 26 (+11 armor, +5 shield, +2 Dex, -1 size, +1 natural, +2 dodge)
hp 71 (11d10+21)
Fort +9 (+4 vs. fatigue, exhaustion, running, forced marches, starvation, thirst, and hot or cold environments), Ref +6, Will +3 (+3 vs. fear); +4 vs. effects that cause you to lose your grip on weapons
Defensive Abilities bravery +3, desert runner
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft., jumper, terrain stride
Melee heavy shield bash +23/+18/+13 (2d6+13) and
. . light shield bash +23 (1d8+13) and
. . light shield bash +23 (1d8+13) and
. . light shield bash +23 (1d8+13)
Space 10 ft.; Reach 10 ft.
Special Attacks weapon trainings (heavy blades +3, close +4)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 24, Dex 15, Con 13, Int 9, Wis 9, Cha 8
Base Atk +11; CMB +19; CMD 33 (37 vs. disarm, 37 vs. sunder)
Feats Bashing Finish, Double Slice, Greater Weapon Focus (shield, heavy), Greater Weapon Focus (shield, light), Improved Shield Bash, Multiweapon Fighting, Shield Master, Shield Slam, Two-weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus (shield, heavy), Weapon Focus (shield, light), Weapon Specialization (shield, heavy), Weapon Specialization (shield, light)
Skills Languages Common, Polyglot
SQ armor training 3, hero points
Combat Gear potion of enlarge person (6); Other Gear +2 full plate, +2 bashing adamantine light steel shield, +2 bashing adamantine light steel shield, +2 bashing adamantine light steel shield, +3 bashing adamantine heavy steel shield, amulet of natural armor +1, belt of giant strength +2, cloak of resistance +1, gloves of dueling, handy haversack, 3 gp
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Bashing Finish Whenever you score a critical hit with a melee weapon, you can shield bash the same target as a free action.
Bravery +3 (Ex) +3 to Will save vs. Fear
Desert Runner (Ex) +4 to Con checks and Fort saves vs fatigue/exhaustion, or ill effects from running, starvation, and temperature.
Gloves of dueling These supple gloves grant the wearer a +4 bonus to her CMD against disarm attacks, attempts to sunder her wielded weapons, and effects that cause her to lose her grip on her weapons (such as grease). The wearer doesn't drop held weapons when panicked or stunned. If the wearer has the weapon training class feature and is using an appropriate weapon, her weapon training bonus increases by +2.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, greater magic weapon; Cost 7,500 gp
Hero Points (1) Hero Points can be spent at any time to grant a variety of bonuses.
Improved Shield Bash You still get your shield bonus while using Shield Bash.
Jumper (Ex) You always are considered to have a running start when jumping.
Shield Master No off-hand penalties for shield bashes, add a shield's enhancement bonus to attack rolls.
Shield Slam Shield Bash attack gives a free bull rush on a hit.
Terrain Stride (-Choose-) (Ex) Not slowed by difficult terrain in chosen terrain, unless magically manipulated.
Weapon Training (Blades, Heavy) +3 (Ex) +3 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Heavy Blades
Weapon Training (Close) +4 (Ex) +4 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Close-in weapons
Hero Lab and the Hero Lab logo are Registered Trademarks of LWD Technology, Inc. Free download at http://www.wolflair.com
Pathfinder® and associated marks and logos are trademarks of Paizo Publishing, LLC®, and are used under license.
Meh, might not be worth the CON loss, it's only 10 extra damage per round...
