|
Now that we have an official forum for this discussion, let's start up the official discussion so Jason can finally comment!
Shield bashers are seriously hampered by the Dex 15 requirement of Two-Weapon Fighting. Most Sword and Board users are also heavy-armor wearing guys and don't focus in Dexterity. Dexterous movements don't really play into the Sword/Shield Knight archetype.
Possibly solutions:
1 - Ditch the Dex 15 requirement for TWF
2 - Add the TWF bonuses to Improved Shield Bash, but only for using a shield bash.
3 - Create a new feat that has Imp Shield Bash a pre-req and has the same result.
4 - Change up shield bashing all together, instead of making it an off-hand attack as normal, make it a special "Shield Bash" that is at a flat -5 and does something other than damage (like a daze effect)
This is exactly right, I would love to shield bash with my paladin (which I think are the core sword/board guys), but the restrictions of DEX and feat chains are to much for anyone but a dedicated fighter, or another melee class that wants to give up everything else in favor of doing this.
I personally feel that the shield bash should simply be an extra attack each round with your shield. You loose your shield bonus to AC if you do so (unless you have imp shield bash of course) and you take a hit penalty with the shield only = to the Shield bonus the shield grants (not to include any magical bonuses).
Thus if you wanted to shield bash with a heavy round shield, you could do so loosing your +2 (or more if you had a magical one) and taking a -2 to hit with it.
I would also add that you could bash with any shield by these rules. Of course a buckler would have maybe a D3 damage and a maximum Str bonus, while a Tower shield would have the same as a heavy shield because moving something that size would not grant you much extra damage. Then of course you would have to add a feat that allowed you to bash with a tower shield and retain your cover bonus.
If you look at Achilles from Troy, or Leonidas from 300...you will see some AWESOME shield bashing, this is how that should work. Your shield was used as much as a weapon as it was as defense. But of course it should take some focus on this to do it right. (feats to not loose bonuses and such).
|
|
I personally feel that the shield bash should simply be an extra attack each round with your shield. You loose your shield bonus to AC if you do so (unless you have imp shield bash of course) and you take a hit penalty with the shield only = to the Shield bonus the shield grants (not to include any magical bonuses).
Thus if you wanted to shield bash with a heavy round shield, you could do so loosing your +2 (or more if you had a magical one) and taking a -2 to hit with it.
This is neat too, maybe tie it to your Check penalty?
Shield bashers are seriously hampered by the Dex 15 requirement of Two-Weapon Fighting.
I completely agree with this statement. It just doesn't seem right that you need as much dex to attack someone with a sword as you do just smack them with your shield that's strapped to your arm.
This is neat too, maybe tie it to your Check penalty?Yea perfect! You take a - to hit = to the shield check penalty! This way it is actually beneficial to have a MW shield. I like it!
|
Have you seen Benny?
How is he hampered?
I do agree with it needing a change but not with the fighter and a high dex comment.
I have seen many a fighter with a high Dex take care of business just as easily as a Str fighter.
|
|
Have you seen Benny?
How is he hampered?
I do agree with it needing a change but not with the fighter and a high dex comment.
I have seen many a fighter with a high Dex take care of business just as easily as a Str fighter.
Except the biggest shield-users are more Paladins and Paladin-like Clerics (Clerics of Iomedae and Sarenrae especially) who are already Multi-Ability Dependant.
Except the biggest shield-users are more Paladins and Paladin-like Clerics (Clerics of Iomedae and Sarenrae especially) who are already Multi-Ability Dependant.
Agree! I was loving the feats until I saw the dex requirement. A heavily armored user isn't going to invest in dex anyway--why penalize them more?
|
|
The most likely candidtaes for a shield bash are people who are already in beefy armor. Beefy armor = not much Dex. No dex = no shield bash? huh? please fix this.
Here's how I feel:
Shield Slam - I do not agree with TWF needed for a prereq. You're already taking major penalties to fight w/ both a weapon and shield in same round without TWF, and so you're either going to shield bash (only) for a better chance to hit, or attack with both and probably NOT hit with the off hand. It makes little sense to make TWF a prereq for this feat especially since those who will be wielding a shield and wanting to benefit from this - are those with little dex, heavy armor wearing folks anyways who need the shield for AC to make up for lack of DEX.
Shield Master- Yes, TWF makes sense based on the benefit it provides (Removes all TWF penalties when shield bashing AND adds shield bonus to attack and damage).
This would be too lucrative without that benefit IMO.
SO - since those who typically would be using shield would be those needing AC from such because they DONT have a good dex, it makes little sense to make feats that benefit those would not have access to them.
My reccomendation:
Remove TWF as the Prereq for both Shield Slam and Shield Master.
Shield Master removes the benefit of "Removing all penalties for fighting with two weapons" and the shield bonus to attack and damage will be benefit enough - especially when combined with the new Shield Feats that increase the shield bonus of the shield - which lets face it - those wanting to truly incorporate the shield as part of their arsenal with this feat will most likely want to take Shield Focus as well. Furthermore, those who CAN take TWF would simply be able to limit the penalty for making the off-hand attack, and simply be better at it than someone who doesn't and thus it's still an incentive to try to take that feat too.
Finally, it is worth noting that table 6-1 in the Beta Book on page 79 do NOT include the prereq of TWF; only the individual feat descriptions mentions the TWF - which I BELIEVE (and forgive me Jason if I'm being too presumptive) that the intent was to actually remove the TWF as a prereq and which is why the table shows it without, but that the desriptions is just a typo/error carried over from the Alpha rules that DID include TWF in BOTH the table and the descriptions....
Robert