It's possibly the most unbalanced item of all (even worse than mithral armor).
Just remove it or make it usable only 3 rounds per day (or something) and when using an animated shield the character may not benifit from any shield feats.
Otherwise, why would any fighter/barbarian/Paladin/cleric, etc. use one handed weapons?
Using two handed weapons should come at a cost. Now it doesn't. As soon as you can buy an animated shield you just buy one and let your cleric cast Magic Vestment.
/Zark
I would say just give it the same handicap that Dancing weapons have: only works for 4 rounds then needs 4 rounds to "recharge"
Also for shield build fighters you can't attack with it.
I would say just give it the same handicap that Dancing weapons have: only works for 4 rounds then needs 4 rounds to "recharge"
Also for shield build fighters you can't attack with it.
Sounds good to me if you add "and the character may not benifit from any shield feats".
Disagree: Dancing weapons get to use feats, animated shield should too, however you should not be able to attack with an animated shield unless it also has Dancing (say by shield spikes) and then the duration of both effects should still be only 4 rounds and count at the same time.
I ban this item I hate it. It is not used ever...it needs dead or usable only in a few artifact like items
Just a footnote ...
When comparing the Animated property versus the Dancing property, it would be useful to keep the following in mind (assuming that PF is keeping the same values as 3.5).
Animated is the equivalent of a +2 bonus for a shield.
Dancing is the equivalent of a +4 bonus for a weapon.
That's a huge difference in monetary/treasure value there!
Yes, the Animated Shield should simply disappear, IMHO.
It is simply a 'compulsory' choice of a lot of my players - and this is a signal of how unbalanced it is as an object.
Why trying to give more love to the 'Sword&Board' when '2-Handed Fighting' can still benefit, too ?
Just a footnote ...
When comparing the Animated property versus the Dancing property, it would be useful to keep the following in mind (assuming that PF is keeping the same values as 3.5).
Animated is the equivalent of a +2 bonus for a shield.
Dancing is the equivalent of a +4 bonus for a weapon.
That's a huge difference in monetary/treasure value there!
I use both. The animated shield is only good vs 1 opponent.
The dancing shield operates as the current animated shield.
I did it for the same reasons as posted above. If you have the money, and you can find it, go for it.
Yes, the Animated Shield should simply disappear, IMHO.
It is simply a 'compulsory' choice of a lot of my players - and this is a signal of how unbalanced it is as an object.
Why trying to give more love to the 'Sword&Board' when '2-Handed Fighting' can still benefit, too ?
Cumpulsory only becuase they don't realise that it's not a good choice... same as two handed fighting right now.
The animated shield is a fine item, but is usually used only by pcs who already use two-handed weapons. The dancing weapon never made much sense to me, though I see someone having is for flavor.
Disagree: Dancing weapons get to use feats, animated shield should too, however you should not be able to attack with an animated shield unless it also has Dancing (say by shield spikes) and then the duration of both effects should still be only 4 rounds and count at the same time.
Animated is the equivalent of a +2 bonus for a shield.
Dancing is the equivalent of a +4 bonus for a weapon.Also, why would anyone fight with onehanded weapons and a shiled when ouy got animated shield. I'd say. it gotta go or it must be really really nerfed.
I like dancing weapons and have done a few characters (and a PrC) based around them (multi weapon fighting juggling out the weapons as each one stopped dancing), however they are rather expensive.
I think it's fine. It costs minimum 9000 gp and the only real benefit is that can use a 2 handed weapon. What's the big deal?
The benefit of using a two-handed weapon and still getting to use shield is enormous. Your damage output will be significantly higher than that of normal shield users, and your AC will be higher than that of two-handed weapon users.
Mechanically, there's practically no reason not to go for a two-handed weapon plus animated shield at first opportunity. The only reasons I can see are flavour reasons, i.e. feeling bad for being such a min-maxer, and that is a feeling that is severely atrophied in many players.
In my house rules, animated is a +4 enhancement. That at least somewhat balances things.
I think it's fine. It costs minimum 9000 gp and the only real benefit is that can use a 2 handed weapon. What's the big deal?The benefit of using a two-handed weapon and still getting to use shield is enormous. Your damage output will be significantly higher than that of normal shield users, and your AC will be higher than that of two-handed weapon users.
Mechanically, there's practically no reason not to go for a two-handed weapon plus animated shield at first opportunity. The only reasons I can see are flavour reasons, i.e. feeling bad for being such a min-maxer, and that is a feeling that is severely atrophied in many players.
In my house rules, animated is a +4 enhancement. That at least somewhat balances things.
I played a character with that setup. He often couldn't bring the shield into play, since he needed his actions for other things. Getting in the command word while trying to move, attack, etc., wasn't always easy.
I think raising the enhancement value(and thus the price, and level at which you can realistically get it,) makes sense. Like many items (handy haversack, anyone?), it offers a lot of bang for the buck.The sword and board fighters have the advantage of being ready with a better AC all the time.
Perhaps the point of Animated is so that the game forgoes the "issue" of sword and board vs. two-handed/two-weapon fighting if the DM wishes.
Right when sword-and-board starts losing its viability, Animated starts becoming viable, to replace it.
Perhaps that's the point in the first place.
-Matt
I think it's fine. It costs minimum 9000 gp and the only real benefit is that can use a 2 handed weapon. What's the big deal?The benefit of using a two-handed weapon and still getting to use shield is enormous. Your damage output will be significantly higher than that of normal shield users, and your AC will be higher than that of two-handed weapon users.
Mechanically, there's practically no reason not to go for a two-handed weapon plus animated shield at first opportunity. The only reasons I can see are flavour reasons, i.e. feeling bad for being such a min-maxer, and that is a feeling that is severely atrophied in many players.
In my house rules, animated is a +4 enhancement. That at least somewhat balances things.
Damage output for a two hander is not significantly better than a "sword and boarder" Benny put that to rest. Even after adjusting for damage reduction he still did more damage than the two hander.
|
Perhaps the point of Animated is so that the game forgoes the "issue" of sword and board vs. two-handed/two-weapon fighting if the DM wishes.
Right when sword-and-board starts losing its viability, Animated starts becoming viable, to replace it.
Perhaps that's the point in the first place.
-Matt
That and the relative durability of monsters that you fight at those levels is high enough to absorb those 2 handed/power attack combos pretty easily. The extra few points of AC are usually meaningless too when monsters are roll 30 somethings (or more) to hit.
The sword and board fighters have the advantage of being ready with a better AC all the time.
Does it say anywhere that the animated shield has a limited duration? I have never seen one. That means that as soon as the sword-and-board-fighter uses his action to put on that shield, the animated-shield-fighter commands his to float in front of him. In fact, I'd say the animated one is better in that regard, since it doesn't tire your arm to have that thing floating in front of it, but a regular shield does drag your arm down...
Damage output for a two hander is not significantly better than a "sword and boarder" Benny put that to rest. Even after adjusting for damage reduction he still did more damage than the two hander.
Who is Benny? Is he a twinked-out fighter 20 who competed against an NPC gnome warrior 1 with a greatclub?
I might concede that the damage difference isn't that much, but there's no way a sword-and-board user can outclass a two-handed weapon user in damage.
Unless you do stuff like shield bash, but that's a completely different story if you ask me.
I'd be very interested in how those tests were done.
I'd have to go with Kae Yoss.
The "animated shield" should be nixed and made a "dancing shield" with the same limitations as a dancing weapon.
On the notes of dancing weapons, I have seen a dwarf fighter with three dancing dwarven throwers, he always had a dwarven thrower in the air hitting something every roundandone in his hand bashing stuff.
It was a pretty sweet idea, a dancing thrown weapon.
In the campaign we are in right now, the Eldritch knight has a cursed, dancing, punch dagger. It's intelligent, and although it doesnt out ego the Eldritch Knight, it only uses its illusionary power when it dances, and it makes an illusion of an warrior weilding it (a ghostly version usually)
Its really a cool weapon.
I cant remember all the "curse" draw backs to his weapon either than it will only work if he doesnt use other weapons, it always appears in his hand before combats (forcing him to se an action to put it away if he so chooses) and it has a chane of polymorphing him into other humanoids each day (it was apparently madeby a chaotic doppleganger wizard)
He's woken up in the morning as a minotaur and a gnoll so far, it's benn pretty funny.
So two really cool dancing weapons Ive seen so far.
An animated/dancing shield Id have a hard time still seeing. But it'd be cool to have a dancing weapon/shield "pair" of magic items that go together as a set!?
How in the world is it shady using exactly what's in the book? At worse you switch hands and use the shield as the off weapon. Either way it's exactly what the rules state you can do. A DM that won't let you use what is in the core book is a DM I don't want.
A DM that won't let you use what is in the core book is a DM I don't want.
Then you'll never play under me. There's a couple of things - not much, mind you, but still - in the cure rules that I won't allow.
How in the world is it shady using exactly what's in the book? At worse you switch hands and use the shield as the off weapon. Either way it's exactly what the rules state you can do. A DM that won't let you use what is in the core book is a DM I don't want.
The DM is the ruler, not the books. A DM fixes bugs and balances things.
Like the the famous bug "great cleave + PA + Whirlwind Attack and the rats in the bag".But that's another thread :-)
Like the the famous bug "great cleave + PA + Whirlwind Attack and the rats in the bag".
Not so famous that I have heard of it. Doesn't WA make GC redundant, and what's with the rats?
Now, a half-brick in a sock and we're talking real weapons...:)
Two words: RAT FLAIL
Anyway getting back on topic, if you don't like the dancing shield, don't make it available in your campaign. I've seen exactly one character ever take advantage of a dancing shield. Are they really that common?
Like the the famous bug "great cleave + PA + Whirlwind Attack and the rats in the bag".
You're just making things up. People abusing whirlwind attack and great cleave with rats.... ludicrous!
It was a bucket of snails! Get your ridiculous exploits straight, man! ;-P
What will you say next? Something about Expert Tactician and a blind goblin????
:D
Unless you're part of the longsword lobby, I don't know why it matters that fighters like fighting with greatswords.
As far as I can tell, all an animated shield does is give a two-handed fighter an extra +2 to his armor class. Big whoop.
Unless you're part of the longsword lobby, I don't know why it matters that fighters like fighting with greatswords.
As far as I can tell, all an animated shield does is give a two-handed fighter an extra +2 to his armor class. Big whoop.
Incorrect... it's a +2 minimum to his AC. If the fighter grants the shield focus feats it's a +4... if it's a heavy shield it's a minimum of +3...
If it is a +5 animated tower shield on a fighter with the two (new) shield focus feats it's + 11 to AC...
With a heavy shield + 5 on a fighter with the shield feats it is a +9 to AC. Those numbers are much more siginificant, and much more do-able with pathfinder's much higher WBL guidelines (almost a 4x increase over the original WBL guidelines in the 3.5 DMG).
My biggest issue with not allowing Benny is he's not an actual Exploit. Those are the exact feats in the exact chain as presented by the designers...
Shield Bash, Shield Slam, Shield Mastery, plus the shield focus feats posted in the new feats section... if they didn't mean for them to work exactly as designed then why design them that way....
After all he's not carrying around a bag of rats to cleave so he can cleave something else.
You're just making things up. People abusing whirlwind attack and great cleave with rats.... ludicrous!
It was a bucket of snails! Get your ridiculous exploits straight, man! ;-P
What will you say next? Something about Expert Tactician and a blind goblin????:D
ha ha ha. well it was so silly i could't get it right. :-)
My point was, there will always be players who abuse the rules and all rules have bugs. That's one of the reasons I say: DM is god, not the rulebook. ....bucket of snails ha ha ha.
That and the relative durability of monsters that you fight at those levels is high enough to absorb those 2 handed/power attack combos pretty easily.
- Well but not as easy as 1 handed attack
The extra few points of AC are usually meaningless too when monsters are roll 30 somethings (or more) to hit
A) not all monsters roll 30 or more.
b) If you don't think a few points of AC matters feel free not to use a shield...and feel free to join the party of "nerf the A.S."c) the "few point of AC" are not so few, see Abrahams post.
d) If the monsters roll 30 the Shields few points of AC do matter, especially if you play a Barbarian. Let's look at a lvl 12 Barbarian:
10 base AC
9 armor - Breastplate +4
3 dex 16 (dex 14 + Ioun Stone - Deep red Sphere)
2 Natural Armor - Amulet or Barkskin
3 Deflection (ring of protection)
3 Animated Shield
1 Ioun Stone - Dusty rose Prism
3 Rolling Dodge
-2 Rage
32
Add magic vestment from a 12 level cleric and the AC will be 34
So the shield bonus will be +3 or +5.
Bo shield AC 29. A.S. = AC 32 or 34.
Also. whether you go 2 handed or two weapon fighting or archery. All of them can use the A.S. Armor check penalty is no problem if you buy a Mithral Heavy Shield.
"Now, a half-brick in a sock and we're talking real weapons...:)"
Ha ha ha , Great :-)
Reminder. This is not a fighter thread and I do not want this thread to slip into a fighter thread.
The A.S. is usable to all melee charecter. And I say the A.S. is more important to the the Barbarian and Ranger (or even Druids) than to the fighter, IMHO.
So Rangers, Druids, Clerics, Paladins, Fighters, Barbarians even Rogues can use it.
Thanx all for the feedback. I will try to be active as muck as possible. Keep on posting.
Damage output for a two hander is not significantly better than a "sword and boarder" Even after adjusting for damage reduction he still did more damage than the two hander.
He he. Well check out Devastating Blow and all other two-handed feats...including the PA.
Also as I pointed out before, if you choose Archery or Two-weapon fighting, the A.S. is the thing for you. Especially for rangers (in their light armor and no armor training).Also, I happen to like the "sword and boarder". Especially the Paladin "sword and boarder" but why play one?
Incorrect... it's a +2 minimum to his AC. If the fighter grants the shield focus feats it's a +4... if it's a heavy shield it's a minimum of +3...If it is a +5 animated tower shield on a fighter with the two (new) shield focus feats it's + 11 to AC...
With a heavy shield + 5 on a fighter with the shield feats it is a +9 to AC. Those numbers are much more siginificant, and much more do-able with pathfinder's much higher WBL guidelines (almost a 4x increase over the original WBL guidelines in the 3.5 DMG).
My biggest issue with not allowing Benny is he's not an actual Exploit. Those are the exact feats in the exact chain as presented by the designers...
Shield Bash, Shield Slam, Shield Mastery, plus the shield focus feats posted in the new feats section... if they didn't mean for them to work exactly as designed then why design them that way....
Great post.
Well I'd say the feats are OK, but I don't like them in combination with the present A.S. I'm not even sure I'd allow (all of) them when using the A.S.
Two words: RAT FLAIL
Anyway getting back on topic, if you don't like the dancing shield, don't make it available in your campaign. I've seen exactly one character ever take advantage of a dancing shield. Are they really that common?
You mean dancing shield or A.S.? Well A.S. is very very common. Hey it's a +1 heavy shiled and costs 9170 gp if you go animated tower shield it's 9190 gp. It's nothing. If you go animated mithral heavy shiled 10020 gp.
Back on subject:
I think that just giving it a time limit would be enough to make people think about taking it a little harder.
This would also be a fairly easy solution to impliment, no worries about re calculating wealth for PC's or NPC's, or figuring out what someone's new AC should be. Just a simple note that after it has been animated for 4 rounds it goes limp.
It would also mean that the character would have to carry the shield normally instead of just leaving it in the air all the time, meaning he couldn't have a bow ready, and certain acts will be slightly harder to perform (or at least require him to put the shield up while doing them).
me
Great post.
Well I'd say the feats are OK, but I don't like them in combination with the present A.S. I'm not even sure I'd allow (all of) them when using the A.S.
Oh I agree that you shouldn't be allowed to shield bash with an A.S. the only feats I would argue to allow with it would be the shield focus ones. If you want to use the shield as a weapon without actually using it you must have the dancing property... A.S. only covers defensive options...
however if the player wanted a dancing and animated shield then I would allow them the attack... but I don't think they could bullrush with it as the shield stays adjactent to them, and the shield made the attack, not the character.
me
Great post.
Well I'd say the feats are OK, but I don't like them in combination with the present A.S. I'm not even sure I'd allow (all of) them when using the A.S.Oh I agree that you shouldn't be allowed to shield bash with an A.S. the only feats I would argue to allow with it would be the shield focus ones. If you want to use the shield as a weapon without actually using it you must have the dancing property... A.S. only covers defensive options...
however if the player wanted a dancing and animated shield then I would allow them the attack... but I don't think they could bullrush with it as the shield stays adjactent to them, and the shield made the attack, not the character.
I think limiting the dancing/animated shield to 4 rounds would be good.
It would do wonders for the forlorn bastard sword. Take a feat for that weapon,combine it with the animated shield, the barbarian for example could loose his shield go nuts for 4 rounds holding the bastard sword two handed and then retrieve the shield as he comes down from rage.Something like that works for me.
Although I would say ,personally unless the shield is weilded by the character, no feats for the shield. (this would also make it less likely to be abused and give it reason for there to be times when the shield is held andtimes hen the shield is loosed)
Weve only used one animated shield ever in our games and it was a big baddy who happened to be a cleric. The shield was also intelligent, and would curse and yell at the PCs and even bit one (well tried to bite,didnt beat the PCS AC) but there was alot of flavor to it.
ha ha ha. well it was so silly i could't get it right. :-)
My point was, there will always be players who abuse the rules and all rules have bugs. That's one of the reasons I say: DM is god, not the rulebook.
We're in complete agreement here. It should not be tried too hard to fix every insane, way-out-there exploit people come up with. Not in the rules. This is not a computer game where you can "outsmart" the game engine and then perform a victory dance - because the "game engine" is sitting at the table and can kick your teeth in. Or at least say "Well, I don't give a flying fork about what the rules as written state, I'm banning the going-back-in-time-to-buff-your-own-father combo, and that's final."
You mean dancing shield or A.S.? Well A.S. is very very common. Hey it's a +1 heavy shiled and costs 9170 gp if you go animated tower shield it's 9190 gp. It's nothing. If you go animated mithral heavy shiled 10020 gp.
Two words: RAT FLAIL
Anyway getting back on topic, if you don't like the dancing shield, don't make it available in your campaign. I've seen exactly one character ever take advantage of a dancing shield. Are they really that common?
Sorry. Meant A.S. Seems to me that bumping it up to a +4 power would fix it. Incidently, I'm the only person (said I'd seen only one) in my gaming group that has ever taken an Animated Shield. (Darkwood Shield enchanted to +1 plus the Animated). And frankly there are still people in the party with better AC than mine.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Damage output for a two hander is not significantly better than a "sword and boarder" Benny put that to rest. Even after adjusting for damage reduction he still did more damage than the two hander.Who is Benny? Is he a twinked-out fighter 20 who competed against an NPC gnome warrior 1 with a greatclub?
I might concede that the damage difference isn't that much, but there's no way a sword-and-board user can outclass a two-handed weapon user in damage.
Unless you do stuff like shield bash, but that's a completely different story if you ask me.
I'd be very interested in how those tests were done.
I remember that he brought up Benny in this thread. As far as I see it involves wielding a spiked heavy shield of bashing in the main hand and a light weapon in your off-hand.
Imho a rather shady interpretation of the rules that most GMs might not allow.
Interesting. I used that exact strategy with a Rgr2/Scout5/PrC cohort - spiked shield as main weapon, light weapon in off hand (usually armor spikes but later a sun blade (since you can use it as a short sword)), plus the Blood-Spiked Charger feat from PH2. He was dishing out horrific damage as a charge-monkey.
But I would certainly agree that while technically it is a weapon and shield tactic, honestly it was a two-weapon build using shield as one of your weapons (and using Ipv Sh Bash to keep shield AC), so to call it a "sword and board" build is pretty misleading.
What people want is for SAB to be good without having to be a TWF/shield basher. How about that it's good for DEFENSE and not sucking on offense? That’s what we’d like to see.