Sorry if this is not the place to post this, or if it has been already posted. I didn't see it anywhere. Please move this to the appropriate place if necessary.
In the Beta, page 16, under the heading of Weapon and Armor Proficiency for the Bard, it states that the bard does not incur spell failure chance while wearing light armor and using a shield. It then goes on to state that a Bard does incur the normal spell failure chance when wearing medium or heavy armor or using a shield.
Does the shield incur the spell failure chance or not?
Good question.
I guess we will need an official answer.
My take would be not to give shields to bards, to keep their hands free.
I don't see a bard with a shield, but maybe that's just me.
Unfortunately, shields are not divided in types.
So if you can wield a buckler (or kote), you can wield a shield.
That's why i would give none. Less is more.
I remember asking this very question before, and the shield does in fact incur spell failure.
Really ? So bards can use a shield, but with spell failure ?
Thanks Jason.
For what it's worth, that's the case in 3.5 as well.Ja, i thought it was stupid as well..I remember asking this very question before, and the shield does in fact incur spell failure.Really ? So bards can use a shield, but with spell failure ?
Thanks Jason.
Doesn't seem so bad to me. Just because you have taken time to learn to use a shield in combat, doesn't mean you can cast with it. If a wizard takes shield proficiency, they still face spell failure.
|
Doesn't seem so bad to me. Just because you have taken time to learn to use a shield in combat, doesn't mean you can cast with it. If a wizard takes shield proficiency, they still face spell failure.
I understand, it just seems stupid that they'd have the proficiency with both armour and shield, but only incur spell failure from the shield. If it were me, i'd either lose the shield proficiency, or say the shield does not incur spell failure.
I understand, it just seems stupid that they'd have the proficiency with both armour and shield, but only incur spell failure from the shield. If it were me, i'd either lose the shield proficiency, or say the shield does not incur spell failure.
Doesn't seem so bad to me. Just because you have taken time to learn to use a shield in combat, doesn't mean you can cast with it. If a wizard takes shield proficiency, they still face spell failure.
You're right, that would be more consistent. And a little less "bookeeping" hassle for the player. No "shield on / shield off" tracking. It is something I can live with though.
You can always pick up a Darkwood Buckler...
The bard only needs to wear his favourite instrument, the gong, in more creative way ;)
|
The bard only needs to wear his favorite instrument, the gong, in more creative way ;)
Lol! That is awesome Zmar! I gotta remember that one.
For what its worth, I agree that officially I understand that they DO in fact incur spell failure from shields, so it would seem the first reference is a typo.
In my own house rules, i don't count spell failure for the buckler if they use that... but like i said, that's just a house rule.
|
You can always pick up a Darkwood Buckler...
The Darkwood Buckler in at least 3rd edition, still had spell failure. Darkwood doesn't negate the spell failure of anything. Only thing that does is mithril out of the core books.
Bards are totally allowed to use shield however and it's often not a big deal if you took like dancing or singing as your perform skill of choice.
Althou I agree that shield might be out the bard's desing idea. It is still a typo on the rule set that I would like to see it clarified. Perhaps bucklers could be and exception. A bard in my campain does use one, and althou I don't oficialy ignore Arcane spell failure for that one. Most of the time I forget about the 5% :P