i know that these questions get asked a lot, so please bear with me. What i was wondering is if you take Shield Mastery and you use two heavy shields, does it completely eradicate the two weapon penalties, or do some remain due to you are using a non light weapon in your off hand?
thanks for your time.
i know that these questions get asked a lot, so please bear with me. What i was wondering is if you take Shield Mastery and you use two heavy shields, does it completely eradicate the two weapon penalties, or do some remain due to you are using a non light weapon in your off hand?
thanks for your time.
Theoretically .. they would disappear.
But to most people here, using to shields offensively .. is a huge load of cheese ;)
Not to mention how you equip them both, all by yourself :P
-TDL
As written shield master removes all of the penalties associated with TWF including the non-light offhand penalty.
Theoretically .. they would disappear.
But to most people here, using to shields offensively .. is a huge load of cheese ;)
Not to mention how you equip them both, all by yourself :P
-TDL
hell I am the first to admit that it is completely ridiculous, the entire idea for it came to me for a dwarven defender back in 3E. however with the entire shield feat tree that pathfinder added I cannot resist.
LaZarX. Seeing as how shield mastery is at the end of a feat line based around two weapon fighting with a shield I believe you may have the wrong idea about it. From what I gathered the feats are meant to allow you to two weapon fight, using a shield as an off-hand weapon, without losing your shield bonus to AC. I am not meaning to be rude in any way but I think you should re-read the feats in question.
I wouldn't allow this in my game. Technically by the rules you can do it but the cheese factor is too much and it's way to unrealistic. I can't see how this would work at all. You'd be over burdened by shields. So not in my game and if I played in game were it was allowed I wouldn't do it.
The rules, as written, permit it. The spirit of the rules weren't intended for it.
A third look, what does it 'hurt' to allow it?
Benefits:
Two 1d8 x2 'weapons'
Decent shield bonus.
At 11th level, you effectively halve the weapon cost and get 'free' shield enhancement.
Cost:
Improved shield bash, Shield slam, Shield Master
TWF guy:
1d6+2 x2, 19-20 x2, -4/-5 rather than 0/0 of shield guy
Decent shield bonus (1 less than shield dude)
Cost:
Improved buckler defense (but -1 to hit with offhand attack(s)), Weapon focus (shortsword), weapon spec (shortsword)
Full price weapons, but +1 enhancement 'free' compared to shield guy
Shields can get bashing, giving, effectively, +3.5 damage for a +1 enhancement. For the same enhancement, TWF guy can get Flaming or similar. Mind you, the shield guy pays only half price.
All in all... I don't think that's balanced. The shield guy is saving a TON of cash by getting to pay armor-prices for weapon enhancement. The shields have slightly worse crits, but otherwise its 'twf with free shield bonus and half price weapons.'
Edit: Forgot shield is 3 feats, not two. Cleaned things up a little.
hmm yeah, you guys have convinced me. while i still really like the flavor of the character(even if it is that of the sharpest cheddar) it would be fair to unbalanced, and to be completely honest after a few sessions of him I would be frightened by what my DM would throw at me in order to balance things...
escalation is a scary thing.
anyways, I guess I will just bookmark this idea for a sillier campaign. Anyone who has any more insights please feel free to keep posting as I will keep reading them in case I decide to pull this idea out again.
Thanks to everyone for their time and knowledge
Remember. Fighters can't have nice things.
My view is that Shield Slam and Shield Master feats can only apply to one of the two shields that a dual shield wielder is using. This is because one of the shields is really being wielded as a weapon (it just happens to be a shield also).
My rationale for seeing it this way is that I do not believe that these feats were ever meant to facilitate double shield fighting.
Remember. Fighters can't have nice things.
And there it is. You guys are getting slow.
Back on topic now.
I do agree with Dilvish, the feats would count for your off hand shield only. As again by RAW a shield bash is an off hand attack, it is also treated as a one handed weapon, not a light weapon, while shield mastery does seem to bypass that it does not bypass the off handed part. So you may only use it on one, the off handed one
So no I would not allow it
A sheild was as much a weapon as any other.
shield weapons part one
shield weapons part two
shield weapons part three
shield weapons part four
sheild weapons part five
shield weapons part six
shield weapons part seven
In the recent game 'Dragon Age: Orgins' there is a great repesentation of how shields can be used for weapons and accually categories them as weapons.
Though it's primary use is defence it is also a weapon.
Using a shield as a weapon is much less cheesy than the standard dagger and shield combo.
Historically it is much more realistic to have the axe sword combination which was used by the vikings to pry shields away from thier citims.
Yes I understand the dagger has it's uses but mostly irrlevent in the fighting that adventures undertake.
There are many layers of... though there is a term for this it escapes me at the moment, disconnect from reality to be able to play these games.
Rules must be slaves to the story not the other way around.
If someone wants to fight as a shield fighter whom uses there shield as a weapon great fantastic they are going down the two weapon path great you don't have to go outside of the core book how easy is that.
Shields were as much a weapon as any other anyone who thinks that is cheesy well perhaps they should watch or play the above that may change there mind.
P.S yes I understand dragon age has a seperate tree for two weapon and shield combat, however the shield tree does not give you attacks in pathfinder.
thanks Caladors. that is a really interesting segment and will definitely help in the creation of the character.
anyway seeing as how i take it there has never been an official ruling referenced in the topic to this point that one hasn't been passed. so i will just see what my dm thinks of it.
three cheers for all things ridiculous!
Another piece of evidence two shields might not be in the 'intent' of the rule:
'You can bash an opponent with a heavy shield, using it as an off-hand weapon.'
(same for light)
Granted, creatures with more than 2 hands can have multiple off-hand attacks, but I think this is a strong indicator that, at the very least, the designers did not intend for two shields.
on page 152 it says that a shields enhancement bonus doesn't improve the shield bash. If you want to have bonuses to attack and damage with the shield you need to enchant it as a weapon at the same cost of a magic weapon.
I still can't believe the quibbling going on here.
A sword and board build is never going to be broken with core.
The isssue is not is it broken or isn't it.
That should never be the issue.
Are we having fun?
Thats the issue.
You can rate and power curve all the builds you want.
But that still doesn't mean a thing when it comes down to it.
The core of rules related issue is, is it so powerful that it will effect other peoples level of enjoyment or is it only going to make it more fun for Timmy and Co.
When the rubber hits the road.
Are you having fun?
Regardless of how the feats work together-
the WBL guidelines assume that weapons cost a certain amount.
Your job as DM is to enforce that. The same is for armor.
They also assume certain penalties for wielding weapons in certain fashions.
Its therefore your job as DM to enforce that too. if the PC's want to, for fluff, swing two shields around then let them. Just make sure the other rules are enforced.
-S