If I recall my history channel, shields used to be the standard for all but the most skill/specialized of soldiers. Under the current system, they really aren't that great (unless you have a +5 animated shield, which needs to go). Can shields get some kind of boost to make people actually want to use them again?
Historically, there was no magical healing. Therefore, the best defense availalbe was a big deal to a warrior. In D&D with magical healing available to adventureres on a daily basis, a lower AC is a trade off you can easily consider.
...yet history is medieval-fantasy's best reference and inspiration.
The same parallel could be done with city walls and fortifications, which loose all their purpose against flying opponents, passwall-type spells, dimension door and cie... and adamantine two-handed swords!
yet kings still live in fortified castle.
'findel
Can shields get some kind of boost to make people actually want to use them again?
This is one of 4E's changes that I actually like. In 4E, shields add their bonus to both AC and Reflex defense (saves). That won't translate perfectly to 3P, but with a little work it'd be a nice addition. My suggestion is to use the higher of your Shield AC or your Dexterity modifier for your Reflex save. That likely prevents Rogues from running around with shields instead of two daggers, but it strongly incentive-izes shields for characters who aren't pure-dex builds. It also chips away at Dexterity's "top stat" status, which is a good thing IMO.
My friends and I created/tweaked a few Feats a few weeks ago on the Feats&Skills forum that let you add the shield bonus to Reflex and Touch Attacks. It's a great idea, it would work nicely if the shields inherently had this ability without using a feat too.
I would rather a Rogue use a 2-hander for the extra damage before they would take a shield into combat, but that's just me. Either way you would need to exhaust a feat or take an obligatory level of fighter/martial class to do so.
I also thought about adding a shield bonus to reflex saves against direct damage spells. But not on all reflex saves. When you slip, a shield does you no good at all to catch something and prevent going over the side of the mountain.
And as said in another thread: Shield bonus to AC for touch attacks, but not when flat footed.
I also allow the Shield bonus to Reflex saves. (It makes sense from the fact that a reflex save means you move out of harms the way, but the reality is that your rogue who evades the dragons breath does not actually move. So bringing a shield up to shield against it makes sense.)
Well, yes and no. Since a creature doesn't fill completely his space (well, except for some oozes), you may simply represent that the Rogue who evades completely the dragon breath does a 'Matrix-move' between the wisps of flame (or acid, or whatever) of the breath itself and is unharmed.
But to remain on topic, it's true that shields need some boost to incourage 'Sword&Board'-ers, so this could be good.
Months back, the idea of adding Shield bonus to Touch AC was considered. Such a change would work to reduce the tremendous gap between AC and Touch AC.
The problem with adding Shield bonus to Reflex saves is that the shield suddenly starts to interfere with the Monk (who cannot use a shield) and its niche of having all-around-Good saves. Give shield-users a Reflex boost, and Reflex-based characters who cannot use shields suddenly fall behind.
-Matt
Months back, the idea of adding Shield bonus to Touch AC was considered. Such a change would work to reduce the tremendous gap between AC and Touch AC.
The problem with adding Shield bonus to Reflex saves is that the shield suddenly starts to interfere with the Monk (who cannot use a shield) and its niche of having all-around-Good saves. Give shield-users a Reflex boost, and Reflex-based characters who cannot use shields suddenly fall behind.
-Matt
Then, perhaps adding only the 'base' Shield bonus to the Reflex save (not counting the enhancements)? I mean, the 'duck behind the wall of steel' bonus would be granted by the dimensions of the shield itself... and a Heavy Shield is not larger if enhanced.
This would lead to a bonus ranging only from +1 to +4 (giving the Tower Shield some love, since it has a nasty -2 to hit that discourages players to use it).Just my 2c.
I must say, I like the idea of having your Shield bonus to your Ref save. Personally, I think that it should -replace- your Dex modifier instead of add to it - this keeps it on par with the high Dex types rather than surpass them.
Also, in the style of "backwards compatibility" it should probably be a feat rather than a standard rule.
I also have another idea:
What if those who use shields gain extra benefits when using the "Fight Defensively" and "Total Defence" actions? Perhaps a higher AC bonus? or maybe some degree of cover?
Just some thoughts.
............
Also, in the style of "backwards compatibility" it should probably be a feat rather than a standard rule.
I'd second the 'add a feat' to give some options to the sword 'n' board fighter rather than complicate shields in general.
I also have another idea:What if those who use shields gain extra benefits when using the "Fight Defensively" and "Total Defence" actions? Perhaps a higher AC bonus? or maybe some degree of cover?
Just some thoughts.
I've played around with house-rules for this and it doesn't seem to be unbalanced. i'd suggest its kept to AC bonus though as although parry's and cover may make logical sense they might complicate the combat too much.
i thought about doubling the shield bonus when using total defense, maybe add 50% for fight defensively?
Director of Games
|
Although this thread is similar to another, there is a point here that I find interesting. Although I am not completely sold on this, I think it might make sense that a shield's bonus act as a cover bonus if you are taking a full defense action.
If you are not, you are more than likely using it to ward off blows, but if you are, you are actually hiding behind it...
This would allow the shield to be added to a touch AC without completely overvaluing a shield by adding its bonus to touch.
Thoughts
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
but a full defense action means you just hide there. IMO this adds very little to the shield
I dont like tower shields as they seem odd to me, really only for wall infantry not for single fighter use.
having said this a feat that allowed you to add say 1/2 your shield bonus to touch ac, then a chain feat that allowed you to add 1/2 your shield bonus to reflex save would be value adding to the shield. IMO.
If you are not, you are more than likely using it to ward off blows, but if you are, you are actually hiding behind it...
This would allow the shield to be added to a touch AC without completely overvaluing a shield by adding its bonus to touch.
Thoughts
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I'm honestly not seeing how adding a shield bonus to "touch attacks" overvalues it at all... Currently no one is using shields*, period.
How do you "overvalue" something that has NO value?
(*Except for some super-duper magically animated one people keep griping about that I've never even heard of, let alone seen being used.)
|
Director of Games
|
I'm honestly not seeing how adding a shield bonus to "touch attacks" overvalues it at all... Currently no one is using shields*, period. How do you "overvalue" something that has NO value?(*Except for some super-duper magically animated one people keep griping about that I've never even heard of, let alone seen being used.)
Lets all try not to suppose our own experience to equate with ALL experiences. That is really not productive to our discussions here. I have added a host of feats to make shields a bit more useful, and I am still sorting through feedback to see if I am there yet.
Add a shield bonus to touch AC greatly overvalues a shield's enhancement bonus over armor's, making me hesitant to make such a chance.
And since we already have a thread discussing this very issue and that one is older, this one is locked.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing