The additional question is:
Do those feats like Shield Mastery, Spield Specialization and their greater cousins apply to Animated shields ?
A good nerf to Animated shields is to rule that such feats only apply to shields worn at the arm.
I can also cope with an increase of the cost to +3.
And yes, rule out that you can't use Bashing with an animated shiled, neither adding dancing shield Spikes.
Break out the nerv gun and set it to full-auto.
It should't be something that's basically a no-brainer for every big weapon fighter.
Make it like a dancing weapon: Need to use an action to activate, only lasts a couple of rounds.
This or kill it....I vote it dies
So, here is my thought folks...
All things being equal, we have 3 basic melee combat builds
A: 2-handed weapon fighter
B: 2 weapon fighter
C: sword and board fighterBoth A and B have the ability to have 1.5 x their Str mod apply to damage against enemies. C has the bonus to AC from a shield, but is only going to get 1 x his Str mod to damage. This shield enhancement allows A and B to step on C's toes.
I know it is not quite as simple as that, but as someone who helped manage a campaign of thousands, once this item got into the mix, it became very common for this very reason. C should be taking a few less hits per day and A and B, but dealing a little less damage.
I am open to debate on this issue, but lets try to stay on topic. There are plenty of corner cases with this one, but I want to stay on the primary issue and not get bogged down in other items/bonuses.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Class abilities, feats, spells and PrC's are all about stepping on toes to be honest. I mean you did exactly that when you buffed up the sneak attack ability, you stepped on all the other melee damage dealer classes toes right? The rogue was fine as it was, you just made it better at that point. Whether it is from min/max'ing things or being bored with the "cookie cutter" class role people are always going to step on others toes with a build, with the choices available one class' role is going to bleed into another. Are you going to nerf everything because some choices are better than others due to the rule set? As far as the few less hits per day, having to roll 15-20 to hit the 2H/2WF as opposed to having to roll a 17-20 to hit the sword and boarder seems to fulfill the requirement with my math. That's 10% less hits throughout a day.
The real crux of the issue is the lack of reason to sword and board in core after you get past the first few levels and have some gold on your belt. There is no reason to keep the shield on your arm, no real feats to promote the sword and board type fighting style and there is no penalty for the other fighting styles using an animated shield. The solution isn't nerfing the animated shield and from the posts here the concern summed up is "The item is a benefit for all types of fighting styles, so it isn't fair to the sword and board fighter." And really, that isn't the animated shields problem, its a problem with the rules. The quick fix is, leave the item as is, add a line to it that says something to the effect of "Using an animated shield causes a -5 penalty to all offhand attacks except shield bash made while it is activated" and rewrite the power attack feat again with something like:
Power Attack (Combat)
You can make exceptionally deadly melee attacks by sacrificing accuracy for strength.
Prerequisite: Str 13, base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: Add an amount equal to your Strength modifier (or your base attack bonus, whichever is lower) to your melee damage rolls for 1 round (in addition to the normal damage modifier from a high Strength score). Subtract the same amount from your melee attack rolls for 1 round. If your attacks are made with a two-handed weapon and you are not using a shield, add an amount equal to double your Strength modifier (or your base attack bonus, whichever is lower) to your melee damage rolls for 1 round (the penalty remains the same).
This allows the animated shield to be available and useful to everyone and curbs the behavior you seem to be concerned with. 2Hers don't get power attack benefits while using it and 2WFers get a penalty as well unless shield specialized and actually using the shield as the weapon.
The real fix is give the sword and boarder some real reasons to do it, expand the sword and board style feat tree like the 2wf and give it more worthwhile feats, this would pretty much be a moot issue. It is because sword and board is a poor choice at this point that the animated shield "steps on someones toes." (I know there were some feats proposed in a thread but I'm at work and getting around the site is a PITA so forgive me if some of the following ideas are already done.) It doesn't have to be all +'s to personal AC feats, it could be things like as an immediate action the character can block and AoO that targets an adjacent player or that a sword and board character provides concealment miss chance when trying to attack through his/her square. Seeing as the damage isn't the game for a S&Ber (I might add you wouldn't know it by the feat tree in PFRPG btw) give some battlefield control options to them instead, keeping other people from getting hit could be a great deal more effective in group.
My vote goes for leaving the shield alone, it should work the same for everyone. Give some rules to make S&B more useful and on par with the 2H/2WF's and don't offer up the animated shield as a sacrificial lamb. It is like putting a band-aid on something that needs stitches. It might be easier, but that doesn't make it better. Just like being a good option, doesn't mean it is broken.
At the minimum, if it's to be kept, it should work similarly to Hand of the Apprentice and explicitly state that Feats and Special Abilities (Armor Training*, etc) do NOT apply to Animated Shields (unless worn as normal Shield). It should also explicitly state that the Animated Shield CANNOT be used for off-hand attacks (unless worn).
...Then again, cutting it saves word count...
Somebody here suggested making Animated Shield work against only one opponent.
And I suggested applying a penalty to attacking offhand or with a two-handed weapon, as the shield gets in the way a bit.
I play a chain wielding ogre with an animated tower shield in a friends game, and he plays an ettin with an animated tower shield in mine.
I really like animated shields as written. But the minmaxer inside me finds them so irresistible, there's really no reason to sword and board, and I think a bit of a scale back would be in order.
I would be in favor of a time limit 3-4 rounds or an increased cost but not both.
Another option would be to reduce the benefit of the shield (say a -2 AC hit) as it's further away from the character and covering less of them. This would make for interesting tactical questions for a two weapon animated shield user. Draw another sword for a moderate AC hit or play it safe.
We could also look at something flavorful like allowing enemies to snatch the shield using a disarm action (with a reduced CMB target number as it ain't really attached to anything).
I'm just really anxious that the shield not be nerfed to heavily. Beside really having no tangible downside it's not a game breaking item, if it's over-nerfed it may as well just be removed.
Ok, so a few have proposed that the sword and board style is the real issue, and not the animated shield? I disagree. I do agree that sword and board needs a little more attention to add more to the style, but you can't refute the basic advantage of S&B in that it gives you up to +6 to +9 to AC at the upper levels without investing a single class resource into it.
That is the basic premise of the sword & board style and the animated property just gives it away... again at no class cost to the TWF or THF... they can just keep specializing in their style.
Are there any magic properties that grant 1.5x strength damage with a one handed weapon? What about any magic items that grant an extra off-hand attack? You could argue the speed property and the dancing property in the latter case, but those properties enhance the abilities of TWF and THF, as well, whereas the animated property doesn't enhance the abilities of the S&B.
I harbor no love for the animated shield, (currently, it doesn't exist in my campaign) but I think it should only "disappear" if the publishers are tight on words and are looking for space. Some people obviously like it and it's been around awhile. It doesn't hurt to try and make it work.
Somebody here suggested making Animated Shield work against only one opponent.
And I suggested applying a penalty to attacking offhand or with a two-handed weapon, as the shield gets in the way a bit.
The one-opponent-only make things complicated, just like the 3.x Dodge feat. I like your idea of an off-hand penalty, though.
Bran.
|
Personally, I think the issue is in the price, and it may be that +2 is too cheap. I think the other suggested complications just make things.... complicated, and could hinder game play. Other than the limitation on how long it can operate for, like a dancing weapon, making changes to how an animated sheld, compared to a normal shield, works in combat seems to me to be counterproductive and liable to lead to errors, abuse and DM headaches.
That is the basic premise of the sword & board style and the animated property just gives it away... again at no class cost to the TWF or THF... they can just keep specializing in their style.
Actually if you look at the S&B "style" it is basically allowing a person to make a shield slam that counts as a bull rush and allows them to keep their AC when they do it, not really "extra" AC, so that argument doesn't cut it. Again if you make an attack with the shield you lose your AC... 2H and typical 2WF aren't making attacks with the shield generally (unless the character is taking 2WF to use the shield as a weapon at which point they are S&Bers really). The tree is essentially worthless unless you are looking for a "flavor" to add to a character. It is a sub par choice for a combat character, it doesn't make you live any longer by not getting hit and it doesn't allow you to kill any faster, it gives you the option to make a certain type of attack that is all and you have to take a 2WF feat (it isn't on the feat list but it is on the feat description and that trumps the table) to get the special attack (a bull rush with a little damage).... S&B isn't even its own style, its a crappy version of 2WF.
A shield is a shield, and an animated shield just allows you to have both hands available. It is a "passive" item, it doesn't kill creatures any faster and in general those items are the ones that have inflated costs (they "do more" for you so they cost more, just look at magic weapon cost vs armor cost). It does nothing to interfere with any style and is available to everyone at the same cost, it doesn't give away anything that had a "class ability cost" attached. Shield Proficiency feat (or that and Tower shield proficiency) is all that is required and over half the classes get it for free.
Are there any magic properties that grant 1.5x strength damage with a one handed weapon?
Don't use a light weapon and you can add 1.5 str to any attack you make, no magic required it is a part of the combat rules.
Furthermore, the animated shield actually allows for a S&Ber to use their weapon 2 handed giving them the option to deal more damage at the loss of their sub par shield slam. How does that hurt the S&Ber? But no one is complaining about that, they are complaining that the tricked out 2H and 2WF can use it at no cost so they are the better choices because of this item. Yes they will have a better AC, but the dedicated S&Ber is still going to have a higher AC if they don't take this enchantment, but apparently it isn't high enough for them to consider it worth it. So make S&B worth it... Make it so the others aren't a decidedly better choice if animated shield is around, if one item invalidates a build THERE IS A PROBLEM and in this case it isn't the "animated shield" no matter what you want to think to the contrary. Hell, I could pop a potion of Shield that is better than an animated shield for pennies on the dollar for stretches of levels and it would end up cheaper than the shield. Better how? There are no penalties, needs no proficiencies, it stops the nasty magic missiles AS WELL as touch attacks and will last for the combat duration easy (10 rounds at first level/cheapest potion). How come no one is yelling "NERF SHIELD it allows the 2H to have a shield and do more damage, NERF SHIELD it allows the 2WF to have a shield and do more attacks, NERF SHIELD because it doesn't stack with a regular shield and makes S&B suck in comparison!!!! NERF SHIELD it is the equivalent of a better than masterwork +3 animated ghost touch buckler at the cost of a first level spell it is broken!!!!" Do you see it now?
What about any magic items that grant an extra off-hand attack? You could argue the speed property and the dancing property in the latter case, but those properties enhance the abilities of TWF and THF, as well, whereas the animated property doesn't enhance the abilities of the S&B.
Actually it does, a S&Ber can use their 1h weapon with 2 hands getting the 1.5 str bonus, that is an enhancement. The other builds just do more damage "so it isn't fair" or doing this rubs people's idea of what "sword and board should be" the wrong way. Again S&B is a nice idea but a failure in execution. S&B is a crappy attack style, it should focus more on defense and give something a regular Joe doesn't get when using a shield (thus why animated shield isn't the problem). At its highest point (all the feats) it amounts to using a shield as a light weapon to do minimal damage (1d4 for a heavy shield and 1/2 str for off hand attacks) and get an attempt to bull rush (combat moves got much harder and if it is in your face willingly its CMB is probably as good as yours if not better) without losing attack bonus and keeping the shield AC (which would be nice if you weren't using a crappy weapon) on ONE off hand attack. Great I'm likely to hit with an extra attack that practically does nothing and by a strict reading of the rules I don't even add in a shield spike if I have one, I can only add the shield bonus (not including the enhancement bonus on the shield) as an enhancement bonus to the hit roll which ends up being my CMB roll for the bull rush as well... There is nothing defensive about it, it is a restricted 2WF. Yeah I guess you could take the rest of the 2WF feats for more attacks but what are you then, a S&Ber or a 2WFer? And wasn't someone just complaining about stepping on toes? Look down, they are your own damn toes.
The best thing to do is rewrite sword and board so that it is worth a damn, honest. If you won't, the least intrusive changes that don't wreck the item are going to be things like I suggested. 2H weapon users will still be able to use the weapon 2H'd they just won't be able to get the full 2H power attack out of it, that is the easy one. 2WFing is a bit tricky as S&B as it stands is 2WF so nerf that and you nerf S&B which is what everyone says is getting the short end of the stick now... Adding a line to the Animated Shield saying off hand attacks get a penalty if they aren't shield bashes is simple as well. Neither of those is more complicated than reading your character sheet and going "Well I have that feat, guess it applies." If that is too much to handle, chances are that person shouldn't be playing the game...
As for the animated shield vs animated weapon, once a shield gives me the same bang for the buck of the weapon I'll consider it. As it stands a 2WF could have multiple dancing weapons, we will work with two for this example for simplicty: 1st round std activate WPN1 and some move - WPN1 Full round attack(it attacks just like the user with his BAB, there is nothing limiting it from making multiple attacks if the BAB is high enough), 2nd round std activate WPN2 and some move - WPN2 full round attack & same WPN1, 3rd round (move/part of move draw weapons) 2WF full round attack & WPN1 full round attack & WPN2 full, 4th round 2WF full round attack & WPN1 full round attack (move sheath non dancing weapon - free action grab WPN1) & WPN2 full round attack, 5th round 2WF full attack action & WPN2 full attack action (move sheath non dancing weapon - free action grab WPN2), 6th round 2WF full attack action (WPN1 rested 2 rounds, WPN2 rested 1 round)... It was probably long dead before we got to round 5. Take it further and if you have the Weapon Swap feat will each dancing weapon do the same 2WF full attack with a single weapon action as the user? That would double the dancing weapons attacks.
You have 2 animated shields? Grats, you only get the bonus from one of them for AC (the highest) and considering that you are starting with a +3 shield to add "other enhancements" the price jumps considerably and the shield options are rather limited to say the least. There is absolutely no possible comparison for the two, it is apples and oranges kids. It isn't worth +3 with a time/activation limit and it sure as heck isn't worth +4. There is more to balance than "I don't like it" I'm sorry to say.
|
I can't see how the Animated Shield could be seen as broken. It is to essential to to many types of builds. Making it Dancing really makes it very useless, unless it is a free action, (not swift or whatever) to activate. There is no good reason to increase the cost, because to be honest, there are not a lot of good, equivalent shied properties, including in the many, many 3.5 books like Item Compendium. Maybe that is your problem, that there are so few other options?
Skylancer, I think that the argument that was being put forth was that the main "benefit" people think of when they go for Sword and Board is that they're getting their shield bonus to AC, which the other fighting styles aren't expected to get. They're sacrificing damage for increased survivability in the form of getting the shield bonus to AC. The current feats for S&B are focused around getting in shield slams, which is probably a poor execution, but that's not what the argument is - it's not an assumption that S&Bers get to make shield slams, it's an assumption that they will have higher ACs in lieu of doing more damage.
That THFers and TWFers can get an almost equal amount of AC from adding a simple +2 enhancement property to a shield is an infringement on the expectations and supposed strength of the S&Ber - higher AC. It's exacerbated by the new THF feats in the Beta, like Overhand Chop, that make it even more dangerous and capable of pumping out damage.
I'm a big fan of the S&B style, and do use it with a fair amount of regularity, and part of it is style, but part of it is that it's a good way to increase my AC, especially at the low levels where I usually play. However, I can certainly see how the animated shield infringes upon the strengths of the style at later levels. Yes, there need to be feats that compliment the S&B style better, but this simple magic property does make it even more of an inefficient style, and that is a problem.
For what it's worth, I've never really considered the Dancing property all that attractive, primarily because of it's limited duration. I'd be much more in favor of increasing the Animated property's cost to +3 equivalent, but I have no problem with a shield floating beside a character and protecting them. I think it's rather cool, visually.
I can't see how the Animated Shield could be seen as broken. It is to essential to to many types of builds. Making it Dancing really makes it very useless, unless it is a free action, (not swift or whatever) to activate. There is no good reason to increase the cost, because to be honest, there are not a lot of good, equivalent shied properties, including in the many, many 3.5 books like Item Compendium. Maybe that is your problem, that there are so few other options?
If something is so good that you simply must have it (that it's essential) then there is possibly a problem with it. That's the idea behind balance, after all - that other options are worth the same. If Animated is essential to most builds, then it's obviously much better than other options, which does skew it towards broken comparatively.
Here's a question for the animated shield junkies: does it work while animated with ANY shield feat(s), splat or PF Beta?
Actually if you look at the S&B "style" it is basically allowing a person to make a shield slam that counts as a bull rush and allows them to keep their AC when they do it, not really "extra" AC, so that argument doesn't cut it.
This is untrue. You are describing feats that build upon the style, not the the basic benefit of the style itself.
To put it more simply:
S&B: gives you better AC
THF: gives you more damage
TWF: gives you more attacks
Forget the feats for a moment...
The animated property gives the basic benefit of S&B to the other 2 styles.
Honestly, I think there could be a few more feats for S&B, but that is another matter and I'm confident we'll be pleasantly surprised that this has been addressed and we'll see it in August when the book comes out.
Listen to what you are saying... the rest of your post clearly points out how this property invalidates investing in the S&B style beyond its basic benefit. If the animated property didn't exist, the S&B style would become more legit, as now the balance of choice between the three basic benefits would be restored. That's certainly easier and more sensible that re-writing the whole S&B feats.
Heck, if there were no feats that catered to S&B and this property was eliminated, S&B would be a good choice... +6 to +9 AC and your feat choices aren't tied to the other 2 fighting styles? ...Clear advantages over the other 2 styles.
This is clearly a have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too property. I'm a little surprised people can't see that.
|
|
I can't see how the Animated Shield could be seen as broken. It is to essential to to many types of builds. Making it Dancing really makes it very useless, unless it is a free action, (not swift or whatever) to activate. There is no good reason to increase the cost, because to be honest, there are not a lot of good, equivalent shied properties, including in the many, many 3.5 books like Item Compendium. Maybe that is your problem, that there are so few other options?If something is so good that you simply must have it (that it's essential) then there is possibly a problem with it. That's the idea behind balance, after all - that other options are worth the same. If Animated is essential to most builds, then it's obviously much better than other options, which does skew it towards broken comparatively.
If this is true, than we need to drop the Greatsword, Bastard Sword, Spiked Chain, Warhammer, and Greataxe. They are just to "absolutely must have" to 2 Handed Fighters and Barbarians, and we can't have that.
|
|
As for the other feats, that entirely depends on the feat. Some feats either require you to or logicly need you to be holding your shield. Like the Shield throw or shield pin feats.
Others like Shield Specialization and Shield Ward do not say so, and there is no reason to believe that they should not work woth an animated shield or a Ring of Shielding.
If this is true, than we need to drop the Greatsword, Bastard Sword, Spiked Chain, Warhammer, and Greataxe. They are just to "absolutely must have" to 2 Handed Fighters and Barbarians, and we can't have that.I can't see how the Animated Shield could be seen as broken. It is to essential to to many types of builds. Making it Dancing really makes it very useless, unless it is a free action, (not swift or whatever) to activate. There is no good reason to increase the cost, because to be honest, there are not a lot of good, equivalent shied properties, including in the many, many 3.5 books like Item Compendium. Maybe that is your problem, that there are so few other options?If something is so good that you simply must have it (that it's essential) then there is possibly a problem with it. That's the idea behind balance, after all - that other options are worth the same. If Animated is essential to most builds, then it's obviously much better than other options, which does skew it towards broken comparatively.
I think the point is that a two-handed weapon fighter can get an animated shield AND his big weapon, whilst the 'sword-n-board' fighter cannot. Since the ...
Heh, nvm - they pulled it from PF Beta. ^_^
|
|
If this is true, than we need to drop the Greatsword, Bastard Sword, Spiked Chain, Warhammer, and Greataxe. They are just to "absolutely must have" to 2 Handed Fighters and Barbarians, and we can't have that.I can't see how the Animated Shield could be seen as broken. It is to essential to to many types of builds. Making it Dancing really makes it very useless, unless it is a free action, (not swift or whatever) to activate. There is no good reason to increase the cost, because to be honest, there are not a lot of good, equivalent shied properties, including in the many, many 3.5 books like Item Compendium. Maybe that is your problem, that there are so few other options?If something is so good that you simply must have it (that it's essential) then there is possibly a problem with it. That's the idea behind balance, after all - that other options are worth the same. If Animated is essential to most builds, then it's obviously much better than other options, which does skew it towards broken comparatively.
Let's look at this item from the standpoint of a two-handed weapon warrior. A greataxe wielding barbarian, or simplicity and iconicity.
The barbarian reaches a point where he has 25,000 gp he wants to spend on improving his AC. He could buy a suit of +5 armor. This is the option that a two-handed character is intuitively limited to.
Or, for the same cost, he could buy a +4 suit of armor, and a +1 Animated Heavy Shield, and end up with an AC that is two higher. (Our sword-and-board fighter can invest in +4 armor and a +3 shield, coming out with an AC two higher than that, or four higher than the barbarian in +5 armor)
Obviously, buying separate items is supposed to be cheaper than one big item. But this isn't the same as stacking a ring of protection and a amulet of natural armor. This item is literally priced in such a way that it is foolish for a two-handed wielder not to use it.
Honestly, there is a simple fix here: Make it like a dancing weapon and give it a duration. The price can stay the same, but the barbarian suddenly has a reason to maybe prefer a auit of better armor, and the action required to float it will actually occur in combat, not first thing in the morning.
|
|
I think the point is that a two-handed weapon fighter can get an animated shield AND his big weapon, whilst the 'sword-n-board' fighter cannot.
That's not true. There are a lot of feats that either really benefit the 1HW over the 2HW, or simply only benefit the 1HW. Not to mention that they can also take the animated shield and use it in ways that the 2HF can not, like TWF, or other little tricks.
As for the other feats, that entirely depends on the feat. Some feats either require you to or logicly need you to be holding your shield. Like the Shield throw or shield pin feats.
Others like Shield Specialization and Shield Ward do not say so, and there is no reason to believe that they should not work woth an animated shield or a Ring of Shielding.
Ring of Shielding grants a force-effect version of an unenchantable no-penalty Heavy Shield - naturally it works with the Sheild feats.
An animated shield is just that - animated. As it costs no actions to the activator beyond the initial command word, why would the magic item retain the owner's skills without the owner still wielding it?
Of course, most animated shields are tower shields in my experience, which gets ugly fast, as it is the one way I can see not sucking the attack penalty from wielding a tower shield...
What is wrong here, all my posts are out of order?
Yeah >.< looks like our posts are a bit scrambled...
Ah well. :) Good points Sir Beckett!
|
|
Ring of Shielding grants a force-effect version of an unenchantable no-penalty Heavy Shield - naturally it works with the Sheild feats.
An animated shield is just that - animated. As it costs no actions to the activator beyond the initial command word, why would the magic item retain the owner's skills without the owner still wielding it?
If you think about it from the shield doing all the work, maybe. However, if you think of the PC haveing the knowledge and experience fighting with shields gaining the benefit rather than the shield, the animated part makes no difference, except that the animates shield specifically tries to block incomming attacks you may not even be aware of.
If you think about it from the shield doing all the work, maybe. However, if you think of the PC haveing the knowledge and experience fighting with shields gaining the benefit rather than the shield, the animated part makes no difference, except that the animates shield specifically tries to block incomming attacks you may not even be aware of.Ring of Shielding grants a force-effect version of an unenchantable no-penalty Heavy Shield - naturally it works with the Sheild feats.
An animated shield is just that - animated. As it costs no actions to the activator beyond the initial command word, why would the magic item retain the owner's skills without the owner still wielding it?
Well, since one does not lose any shield bonus to AC when flat-footed or otherwise unaware of an attack, the animated shield is not functionally any different from a standard wooden or metal shield.
As far as shield feats - I would argue strongly that sheild use begins with the Proficiency feats and goes up from there. You can try to block blows with a shield untrained - good luck doing it with any reliability until you have that training though. In some ways the game mechanics for shields are unsatisfactory - but that's been the case for D&D since it began with a '+1 plus magic' bonus being all that ever applied from a shield. Of course, back then, sword-n-board was king, because the only difference in damage between a longsword and a two-handed sword was between 1d8 and 2d6.
I can see the animated shield being 'base proficiency' with itself (plus any additional enhancement bonus), but not more without substantial cost increase for the shield.
Another point to look at - is an animated shield considered an attended item? After all, it is not on the owner's person or being physically wielded, so it's certainly easy enough to directly target and sunder...
Although for PF Beta purposes, the item was yoinked completely from the list, reducing this to a theoretical discussion at the present time...
|
|
I don't see any problem with a shield being targetted, sundered, or stolen. No reason they should not be able to have these things done to them. Maybe the problem is not the Animated shield, but that the penulties from not being proficient are not good enough? This I can somewhat agree on, though I find it hard to get a balance on what they should be.
If something is so good that you simply must have it (that it's essential) then there is possibly a problem with it. That's the idea behind balance, after all - that other options are worth the same.
Agreed. Following that same line of reasoning, magic is a problem, it is too good - but I HIGHLY doubt that we are going to see a system wide change/nerf. An animated shield isn't essential, it doesn't come without drawbacks and at mid to higher levels of play it is a crap shoot whether or not it will even be effective. You are using a heavy shield, you still take skill check penalties and arcane spell failure risks. Using a tower shield? You still take the -2 to attacks on top of all the rest... The 2H fighter who is blowing to hit to get more damage isn't going to want to take a bigger penalty, the 2WF is in the same boat. Yes that is the case with a tower shield specifically, but that is also where the highest gain from AC is coming from shield wise. And I already pointed out that the Shield spell is VASTLY superior to an animated shield if we are going to compare the buckler/light/heavy shields. Shield potions are available to everyone without limitations like proficiencies... Go ahead and dispel my shield spell, I'll drink another potion. Dispel my animated shield? It drops to the ground worthless for rounds+
If Animated is essential to most builds, then it's obviously much better than other options, which does skew it towards broken comparatively.
It isn't essential and actually the cases against, 2H & 2WF, are limited. What about the cleric who uses the animated shield so they can hold their holy symbol in the off hand ready to use, or the bard with an animated shield so they can use their instrument. The animated shield offers the same benefit to EVERYONE that alone makes it balanced, again I will conceed that it is a good choice but that doesn't make it a broken item. When used as intended it is fine, the other rules are what are making it a problem for some people.
This is untrue. You are describing feats that build upon the style, not the the basic benefit of the style itself.To put it more simply:
S&B: gives you better AC
THF: gives you more damage
TWF: gives you more attacks
Ok I'll give, I guess technically you are right. The problem with that is if we are going to look at it that way it is less a style and more a theme. Why? 2H is the ONLY one that doesn't require some sort of extra proficiency. Anyone can pick up a 1H weapon and use it 2H'd with no investment. Any martial class can pick up and use the S&B theme with no investment. And actually anyone can use 2 weapons, they just won't hit anything -ever- without a lucky roll. Which brings us to the game mechanics of a "style"... A "style" requires some investment to be useful. 2WF requires feats, and 2H requires "power attack" to be really useful. S&B requires... Wait there isn't any requirement to make S&B effective - you have the proficiency and it happens. So we go to the S&B feats, look at that - crappy 2WFing. Paizo has basically stated that S&B is smack with shield (and I was wrong shield spikes cause the shield to do damage as one size better so I think we are looking at 1d6 base - sorry about that, better but it is still pretty damn bad) and make a bull rush. The PFRPG S&B "style" is sub optimal at best at its core. If S&B is supposed to be the "defense" style make it add to defense, rewrite the tree so there are some prereq's and then a few really nice higher tree abilities so the character who invests in it gets a couple of points of AC out of it. You do that, everyone benefits from the animated shield like they can now, the S&Ber just gets the benefits from the shield tree feats and can decide to use an animated shield to us his/her 1Her with 2 and deal more damage.
Listen to what you are saying... the rest of your post clearly points out how this property invalidates investing in the S&B style beyond its basic benefit. If the animated property didn't exist, the S&B style would become more legit, as now the balance of choice between the three basic benefits would be restored. That's certainly easier and more sensible that re-writing the whole S&B feats.
Yet again, the only people who are getting "a great benefit" out of it are the 2H and 2WFers of the world. That to me points to a rules problem, if everyone had a shield spell 2H and 2WFers are better off, its the same thing. Using animated shield as a measuring tool just makes it apparent that S&B is sub par, at first level you can buy a potion of shield and the same thing occurs - not an animated shield problem - rules problem. Nerfing the ability to use those fighting styles with an animated shield solves the problem as well without removing a staple fantasy item. If I wanted to play a conservative game, I wouldn't be playing D&D, I'd be playing a game where everything is the same by a different name and it is all measured by points so we know it is balanced more than D&D could ever be. I don't have a problem with the rules as they are now, the only reason I offered the suggestions I did were because they allow the item to stay the same and solve the complaints others are having with it. It is a cool item but it isn't essential and it isn't anywhere near the "game breaker" that it is being made out to be. But then again these boards are FULL of "nerf this, nerf that, this is overpowered, bring back this" posts. And honestly I'm seeing why my friends have started to not even bother looking through the site any more. If half the complaints are addressed that have been posted and changes made, I'm quite sure they are right and PFRPG won't be for us which is a shame. Some of the changes have been good (Polymorph/wild shape) but other have been poor (Sneak attack comes to mind, we are on the fence with CMB's still), we don't play core only - we have practically all the books available so the more "base" changes like this that are made the more crude we have to change across all the books. At a certain point it is just easier to say "Screw it, 3.5 with a few house rules from BETA" than go through and do all the stupid little changes that really weren't required when the bigger problems (Fighter vs Wizard/CODzilla) still haven't been addressed.
Damn that turned into a rant, sorry about that, done.
Skylancer 4,
First, no offence taken... it did not seem like a rant to me.
I agree with you that S&B feats should lend themselves to defense. I'm not disputing that and won't bother to go into detail as that gets off topic, other than to say this: it's not likely that the whole S&B feats will be overhauled, but I bet new feat options will be added that cater to the defensive side of S&B.
But the animated property currently steps on the toes of the S&B warrior. I don't see how anyone can dispute that. Why would you choose to take a shield over a great weapon? Or using two weapons? Or using a ranged weapon? To get a better defense of course. These are important choices. The animated property makes the weapon and shield option largely irrelevant, regardless of how you change S&B feats to make them "better".
I admit, I don't like the item, but as I've said before I think it should stick around for those who do. But I do believe it needs to be changed.
As to the end of your post, I'm more optimistic. Remember that this is a playtest, and they have thrown a lot of things out there just to try, and I'm sure they didn't forsee all the things that many feel needed to be addressed in the beginning, (I don't think any one person can) and that is where our feedback is invaluable to them.
Just an idea to throw out...
What if an animated shield could be commanded by the user to defend someone other than the wielder... as a swift action to maintain or something?
What if an animated shield could be commanded by the user to defend someone other than the wielder... as a swift action to maintain or something?
That might not be a bad idea.
