pg 459 Magic items on the body
"It's possible for a creature with a humanoid-shaped body to wear as many as 15 magic items at the same time."
"A humanoid-shaped body can be decked out in magic gear consisting of one item from each of the following groups, keyed to which slot on the body the item is worn.
The list that follows includes the Shield as a worn item.
So, for pathfinder, shields are effectively worn items. Note that weapons don't appear on the list.
Thanks, I thought I was going to have to find that myself.
An interesting side note: Shields in 3.0 provided "armor bonus" that unlike other bonuses of the same type stacked with worn armor. I was changed to "shield bonus" in 3.5, IIRC to prevent the "abuse" of wizards equipping mithril bucklers with enhancement bonuses and then casting the shield spell on top of that for extra AC. Mind you the shield spell, which was a deflection bonus, then was also changed to provide a shield bonus, despite the fact that you don't need a proficiency to use it, or the fact that isn't worn and hovers in front of you.
pg 459 Magic items on the body
"It's possible for a creature with a humanoid-shaped body to wear as many as 15 magic items at the same time."
"A humanoid-shaped body can be decked out in magic gear consisting of one item from each of the following groups, keyed to which slot on the body the item is worn.
The list that follows includes the Shield as a worn item.
So, for pathfinder, shields are effectively worn items. Note that weapons don't appear on the list.
Quote is persuasive. I concede the point. Shields are worn in Pathfinder.
You can't hold a sword +5, wildshape, and have it still usable. You also can't place wild on a weapon.
A shield is a weapon, in addition to being a shield.
Ergo, a merged shield cannot provide a weapon benefit. Since those benefits are part and parcel of the shield as a whole, there's no way a shield can provide an AC benefit while merged, either.
==Aelryinth
So, your position is "If you can't use every property of an item when wildshaped, you lose the constant bonuses provided by that item"
So where does that take us?
You can have a hat of Wisdom +4.
Then you can pay to have a second enchantment put on the hat - maybe a helm of telepathy ability.
According to the rules, the wisdom bonus would stick, but the telepathy ability (which isn't constant) wouldn't.
However, if we are to use your logic you lose both.
The rules could be interpreted this way I suppose, when it says that "items that provide a constant bonus and don't need to be activated" I would suggest the "don't need to be activated" would be helping to define what a "constant bonus" is, but it could be interpreted your way as well I suppose...
No, treant, you're taking it three steps further then is clearly delineated.
A Helm of telepathy is not a weapon.
A Shield IS a weapon. It's an essential function of it...you can shield bash with it, you don't need a special skill to do this.
Weapons do not merge.
Weapons don't get Wild.
Ergo, the shield satisfies neither condition, and will not merge.
I would apply the same argument to Armor spikes, as an example. They are specifically weapons, so they won't merge, so the armor won't merge. Now, I'll agree that if the armor is wild, the spikes it bears should stay in effect...but otherwise, it won't merge at all because it can't take the weapons with it.
I'm really not sure how you got miscellaneous magic items out of shields!
==Aelryinth
No, treant, you're taking it three steps further then is clearly delineated.
I thought you were talking about items with constant effects vs those without. In my defense, there was no reasonable way I would have assumed you meant that weapons do not merge when you wildshape.
A Helm of telepathy is not a weapon.
Well, you CAN use it as an improvised club...
A Shield IS a weapon. It's an essential function of it...you can shield bash with it, you don't need a special skill to do this.
Nor do you need a special skill to bash with an improvised club. Your point? Wait - you are getting to it. An insane point at that.
Weapons do not merge.
WHAT???
SRD: "all of your gear melds into your body" How in the name of all that isn't insane did you come to the conclusion that this means weapons don't merge?
Weapons don't get Wild.
What are you talking about? Nothing but armor and shields can qualify for the wild enchantment, but the wild enchantment has NOTHING to do with the items eligibility to qualify for merging with a druid wildshaped form. Where on earth do you come to the conclusion that it does?
Ergo, the shield satisfies neither condition, and will not merge.
DOUBLE WHAT??? What conditions are you referring to? The only condition I know of for something to merge is that it must be "gear". That's certainly the only qualifier the rules give. I never saw "Must be applicable for the Wild enchantment (ignore the part about shields actually being eligible for this)" as a requirement.
I have no idea what the other condition that the shield doesn't fit is.
I would apply the same argument to Armor spikes, as an example. They are specifically weapons, so they won't merge, so the armor won't merge. Now, I'll agree that if the armor is wild, the spikes it bears should stay in effect...but otherwise, it won't merge at all because it can't take the weapons with it.
Are you making this up as you go along? Where did you come up with the crazy idea that weapons don't merge?
I'm really not sure how you got miscellaneous magic items out of shields!
My mistake - I was assuming there was something about your argument that had a basis in the rules. Now I'm educated.
(sigh...)
Aelyrinth, you're not talking of rules. You're giving your (misjudged) opinion of how the game works, and stating it as if it is RAW. Not for the first time, it is being pointed out to you that you need to differentiate between the two.
Nevertheless - of course - batting down poor arguments doesn't prove that a shield is functional during wildshape.
There are points where RAI has to be considered when RAW is lacking. Until we get a ruling, the RAW are unclear on shield functionality when wildshaped, but - on balance - it seems to me clear that the combat druid is intended to be offense at the price of defense. Allowing a 4th level druid deinonychus to benefit from a +1 heavy shield is a significant boon. All the more so if a wildshaper ignores the encumbrance of (for example) a Cloak of Resistance - in which case, he presumably also ignores the weight and penalties of melded armour and shields, tower or otherwise. (This, too, is unclear).
Nor would this have been admissable under 3.5 rules. As others have pointed out, the shield-wildshape loophole appears to be the unfortunate side-effect of Pathfinder's efforts to reword and re-rule Polymorph.
You could always wildshape into a dire ape and still wield the shield...Is there an actual rule or ruling somewhere that says apes can use weapons, or have people just assumed that they can because their paws seem closer to human hands than other animals'?
You don't become an ape. You might say you become an ape with the soul / mind of a druid. You still keep your feats, skill ranks, base save bonus, BAB and Class Features such as Weapon and Armor Proficiency unless the Class Features depend upon form. An ape has a humanoid form.
The list that follows includes the Shield as a worn item.
So, for pathfinder, shields are effectively worn items. Note that weapons don't appear on the list.
The only reason weapons do not appear on that list along with shields is that the number of weapons a creature can wield varies according to the number of limbs it has and whether those limbs have the fine motoric capacity to utilize them.
As for the words wear/worn those are an example of poor wording that should be considered errated.
As for the words wear/worn those are an example of poor wording that should be considered errated.
+1
So, your position is "If you can't use every property of an item when wildshaped, you lose the constant bonuses provided by that item"You can't hold a sword +5, wildshape, and have it still usable. You also can't place wild on a weapon.
A shield is a weapon, in addition to being a shield.
Ergo, a merged shield cannot provide a weapon benefit. Since those benefits are part and parcel of the shield as a whole, there's no way a shield can provide an AC benefit while merged, either.
==Aelryinth
I agree with Treantmonk. You logic is a bit far-fetched here.
Edit:Aelryinth you got the word merge wrong. Merge means an item melds into your body. Hey, english isn't my language either so I too ger stuff wrong ;-)...I happens all the time.
|
The only reason weapons do not appear on that list along with shields is that the number of weapons a creature can wield varies according to the number of limbs it has and whether those limbs have the fine motoric capacity to utilize them.As for the words wear/worn those are an example of poor wording that should be considered errated.
Do you have a book entry to back that up?
Do you have a book entry to back that up?
The only reason weapons do not appear on that list along with shields is that the number of weapons a creature can wield varies according to the number of limbs it has and whether those limbs have the fine motoric capacity to utilize them.As for the words wear/worn those are an example of poor wording that should be considered errated.
Do I need one?
Page 150
"Shields: If a character is wearing armor and using a
shield, both armor check penalties apply."
"Shields: If a character is wearing armor and using a
shield, add the two numbers together to get a single arcane
spell failure chance."
They don't use the wording: wearing a shield.
...I wonder why ;-)
To understand a text you have to read it. And we all read texts in different ways. Reading the text is interpreting the text. There is more to a text than just the words.
Wild shape & Shields? We all have the rulebook, the text, but we read the rules differently. Right?
To understand a text you have to read it. And we all read texts in different ways. Reading the text is interpreting the text. There is more to a text than just the words.
Wild shape & Shields? We all have the rulebook, the text, but we read the rules differently. Right?
I also think some aspects of the game are so obvious to the game designers (from a logical point of view) that attention to wording is not as sharp as some players need.
But I think there is a limit to the demands we can place on game designers. If no ambiguity is accepted (and left to common sense) and if every single eventuality should be taken into account, not only would the PRPG book not have been available until 2015 it would be illegible to all except graduates from law school.
Sigh, okay, let's get further specific.
You can't have a weapon MERGE into your body and remain USABLE. In other words, if you wildshaped with a SWORD +5, it doesn't remain usable while you are in wildshape...i.e. you suddenly have an unseen weapon doing dmg in place of a hoof attack. Your only recourse is to wildshape, then pick it up from where you dropped it ahead of time, and be in a form capable of using it (maybe an Ape).
A Shield is a weapon. It can't provide a shield bonus of any sort while merged, the same way it can't be used as a weapon while merged. This would violate the unusability rule.
A shield is a weapon. Weapons cannot be made Wild. It STILL won't work while wildshaped, as it would violate this second restriction. Ergo, you can't have a Wild shield providing a shield AC without also violating it's unusability as a weapon.
This is why I made the armor spikes example. You could make armor Wild, but you can't make the spikes. You can't have Wild Spiked Armor...if you can, then reasonably, you should also have Wild Greatswords +5. You're applying Wild to a weapon.
This is what the rules are. It's pretty clear. I don't see what all the trouble is about.
==Aelryinth
|
|
This is why I made the armor spikes example. You could make armor Wild, but you can't make the spikes. You can't have Wild Spiked Armor...if you can, then reasonably, you should also have Wild Greatswords +5. You're applying Wild to a weapon.This is what the rules are. It's pretty clear. I don't see what all the trouble is about.
==Aelryinth
I don't think that really works as an argument, because you can take any item and use it as a weapon. Which would then rule out any item at all continuing to function just because you *can* use it as a weapon.
Perhaps a better interpretation is that if you're currently using an item as a weapon, it doesn't remain usable when it merges.
That better matches the examples in the text. It also leaves shields open to use, as long as you're not currently shield bashing with it.
|
|
RAW hinges on the term.. Activated. The core of my argument is that unlike armor, a shield is like your weapon, it's properties including it's defensive bonus is use-activated, not a constant function.Wildshape and the shaping spells only lets you keep constant bonuses that don't require activation. A buckler's bonus for example is not constant. If you use a weapon in your buckler hand, you lose it's shield bonus, you've de-activated it.
The problem is that, while there are specific examples of a shield ceasing to function, there are also specific examples of a shield continuing to function even when it can't be brought between an attack.
A good example of this would be with initiative and a surprise round.
The bad guy goes first, the fighter can't do anything yet. The bad guy attacks the fighter. Even though the fighter can't act and is flat-footed, he still receives his shield bonus to ac. So there's an example of the shield continuing to function even though there's no way it's being "used".
With even one example of it functioning as a constant bonus, that's still it functioning as a constant bonus. Everything else that the shield can do or be affected by can be viewed as special uses of the item, which can cause it to stop functioning as a constant bonus.
Which is one of the reasons behind my previous example. A special use for a headband of wisdom would be to use it to deal 1d3 damage *or less* to a target. This specialized use keeps it from functioning as a continuous bonus for the duration of the event. Once it is used in the default manner again, it's back to being a continuous function.
The shield has similar specialized uses, and caveats which can keep it from functioning as a continuous item. But once you go back to the default shieldness, it resumes normal function again.
This thread has become circular.
Here's the arguments I've seen that are worthy of response and my responses for each. I'll cease to respond to these same arguments unless something new is brought to them.
1) The designers intended for shields to not work with wildshape.
I happen to think this was probably the intention of the designers as well. However, through experience, I've decided that certainty of anyone's intentions but your own is impossible, and a tad presumptuous.
2) Shield is a kind of armor, therefore when the polymorph rules exempt armor bonuses from transferring to wildshape, this applies to the shield as well.
Armor is a type of equipment, armor bonus is a kind of AC bonus. A shield is a kind of armor that does NOT provide an armor bonus. When the rules refer to "armor" it is reasonable to assume that shields may be included. When the rules refer to "armor bonus", shields are explicitly excluded. This second point is made quite clear under the AC bonuses section.
The polymorph rules exempt "armor bonuses" not "armor"
3) Shields are use activated as per the "use activated" chart in the rules, and therefore do not provide a constant bonus (since they must be activated), and therefore, according to the Polymorph rules, they don't transfer.
Also listed under the "use activated" chart are rings of protection, and other obviously constant bonuses from worn items. If we remove all bonuses from the "use activated" chart - then there are no constant bonuses at all. Just because you can remove it, and therefore remove the bonus, does not make the bonus a non-constant one.
4) Use a shield as a weapon and you lose the shield bonus. Weapons don't work when you merge them in wildshape, therefore shields don't work either since they can be used as weapons. [b]
Your helmet of Wisdom +4 can be taken off and swung as an improvised club, yet I don't see anyone suggesting the wisdom bonus provided from that helmet should not be allowed.
Obviously you can't use any merged item as a weapon. However, constant bonuses that items provide work in wildshape according to the rules.
[b]5) Shields require an action to use, since they must be "use activated" to intercept the attack.
You can't take actions when flat footed, yet shields still provide their bonus. Apparently an action is not required to get the shield bonus.
Wearing the shield is all that is required to get the shield bonus, you even get the bonus if you are unconscious or unaware of an incoming attack. A penalty is assumed if you don't have the appropriate feat, just like with armor.
6) The "wild" enchantment allows shields. If shields provided their bonus when wildshaped, then why are they listed under the "wild" enchantment?
The rules clearly have an inconsistency. However, that does not mean that the Polymorph rules are where the error was made. As written, the shields work with the Wild enchantment and with Wildshape, which makes the former worthless. This suggests errata is required on this issue, either to remove Shields from the wild enchantment or to add them to the Polymorph exceptions. Until that happens, the rules on both remain as written, and a wild enchantment on a shield is possible, but useless.
7) Shields working with wildshape isn't logical.
Agreed. However, there are other rules that are illogical as well. The "wild" enchantment itself is illogical. No rules represent reality perfectly.
Are there any other points? I'll respond to anything original or different. Otherwise, refer to my response in this post.
Using a Helm of telepathy as an improvised weapon is also impossible under Wildshape rules. Where does this have anything to do with the bonus that it provides, or powers that are usable?
Note also you could not technically put Wild on a Helm of Telepathy, as it isn't armor...it's a wondrous item.
Why, none at all. Ergo, it has no relevance to a shield example whatsoever. You also don't get the +4 bonus whatever if you use it as a weapon instead of properly...so it fails on 3 counts, here.
None of you ever made the example of a Shield of Fire Resistance 10. That's a passive effect, and certainly usable while the shield is merged. It has nothing to do with the form or actual physical prescence of a shield. Ditto armor of acid resistance 10.
A shield is not an improvised weapon and has nothing to do with them. It IS a weapon.
I can't see where this is so hard to understand. The rules for weapons are explicit, and a shield never gives up being a potential weapon, unlike your helm example. Wild can't be put on it, and it has no benefit while merged as a shield or weapon. That's it.
==Aelryinth
|
|
Using a Helm of telepathy as an improvised weapon is also impossible under Wildshape rules. Where does this have anything to do with the bonus that it provides, or powers that are usable?
Note also you could not technically put Wild on a Helm of Telepathy, as it isn't armor...it's a wondrous item.
Why, none at all. Ergo, it has no relevance to a shield example whatsoever. You also don't get the +4 bonus whatever if you use it as a weapon instead of properly...so it fails on 3 counts, here.None of you ever made the example of a Shield of Fire Resistance 10. That's a passive effect, and certainly usable while the shield is merged. It has nothing to do with the form or actual physical prescence of a shield. Ditto armor of acid resistance 10.
A shield is not an improvised weapon and has nothing to do with them. It IS a weapon.
I can't see where this is so hard to understand. The rules for weapons are explicit, and a shield never gives up being a potential weapon, unlike your helm example. Wild can't be put on it, and it has no benefit while merged as a shield or weapon. That's it.
==Aelryinth
Apparently because you missed the point I was making. I never said you attacked with the helm while in wildshape.
I pointed out an example where a character who is not wildshaped retains his shield bonus when unable to *use* that shield due to restricted actions.
I pointed out how you can use a wonderous item as a weapon, and when doing so that if you wildshaped you wouldn't get the benefits.
Which is a direct comparison to using a shield as a weapon.
I can't see where this is so hard to understand. The rules for weapons are explicit, and objects never give up being potential weapons. Unless, that is, they've been merged into your wildshape form. That's it.
To both posts above:
WWWW: If you can find rules that support allowing improvised weapons to retain all their bonuses to you while in wildshape form OR while being used as weapons, you've a point. Otherwise, you're conjuring an argument out of thin air. I can point a finger and tell you to find rules that don't exist either, you know.
Magicdealer: I'm afraid you've lost me on your point. Are you trying to make some sort of connection between a shield giving a bonus while you can't move AND being able to give a bonus while merged?
My point is very simple. A shield is both weapon and defense. Unless you can apply both, you don't get the benefit of either.
Ergo, you don't get the shield bonus while wildshaped because you can't use it as a weapon while wildshaped. Because it's a weapon, you can't Wild it. So, either you wildshape and merge it, and only passive magical effects apply, or you leave it off and adopt a form that can maybe use a shield.
A wondrous item employed as a weapon doesn't give any benefits whatsoever, so I'm not sure where you are coming from. Since weapons can't merge, you can either get its benefits and merge it, or use it as a weapon and not be able to merge it. Not sure where the problem is, here.
==Aelryinth
WWWW: If you can find rules that support allowing improvised weapons to retain all their bonuses to you while in wildshape form OR while being used as weapons, you've a point.
(emphasis mine)
This does not match up with your argument at all. Shields don't retain their defensive bonus when used as weapons either (unless you have a specific feat to override this). Why would you place a condition that they needed to find rules that other items must retain their bonus when used as weapons?
My point is very simple. A shield is both weapon and defense. Unless you can apply both, you don't get the benefit of either.
This is demonstrably false. Magicdealer killed this point already.
If you are paralyzed you cannot use your shield as a weapon, but you still get the defensive bonus.
Therefore, you demonstrably CAN get the defensive benefit of a shield when you cannot gain the benefit of it as a weapon.
Magicdealer: I'm afraid you've lost me on your point. Are you trying to make some sort of connection between a shield giving a bonus while you can't move AND being able to give a bonus while merged?
No, your point (which you restated) was not wildshape specific. He proved your point dead wrong.
The point he was making was providing RAW proof that although a shield is both a weapon and a defense, even if you can't apply both, there are specific rules regarding how you can still gain the defensive benefit.
WWWW: If you can find rules that support allowing improvised weapons to retain all their bonuses to you while in wildshape form OR while being used as weapons, you've a point.(emphasis mine)
This does not match up with your argument at all. Shields don't retain their defensive bonus when used as weapons either (unless you have a specific feat to override this). Why would you place a condition that they needed to find rules that other items must retain their bonus when used as weapons?
My point is very simple. A shield is both weapon and defense. Unless you can apply both, you don't get the benefit of either.This is demonstrably false. Magicdealer killed this point already.
If you are paralyzed you cannot use your shield as a weapon, but you still get the defensive bonus.
Therefore, you demonstrably CAN get the defensive benefit of a shield when you cannot gain the benefit of it as a weapon.
Magicdealer: I'm afraid you've lost me on your point. Are you trying to make some sort of connection between a shield giving a bonus while you can't move AND being able to give a bonus while merged?No, your point (which you restated) was not wildshape specific. He proved your point dead wrong.
The point he was making was providing RAW proof that although a shield is both a weapon and a defense, even if you can't apply both, there are specific rules regarding how you can still gain the defensive benefit.
Treant, you're being situational again. Saying 'you're paralyzed so your shield is not a weapon' has to be put in the same context as 'you're paralyzed so your sword is not a weapon.'
Both are patently not true, so it's a false argument.
Application of both standards is not the point. There's a thousand instances where you can't use a sword (the enemy is across the canyon, so my sword is not a weapon?)...the sword is STILL a weapon, because it's classified as a weapon. Simply because you're using a shield as a defense or a weapon at any particular instance doesn't make it any less a defense or a weapon.
Both arguments are wrong on their merits. You're trying to somehow define shields as 'not weapons.' They ARE weapons, same as a sword. And its the fact that they ARE weapons which is the crux of the argument. The 'default' defensive nature of the shield has nothing to do with granting a bonus while wildshaped.
It's a defined weapon. It won't merge.
It's a definied weapon. You can't Wild it.
If you want it able to merge, then you have to treat it as a merged weapon...useless until you wildshape out.
That's really all there is to it. Why is it such a quandary?
As for WWW, I don't see a single rule ANYWHERE that says while wildshaped, you retain a merged shield's benefits. If he can kindly point that out, I'll also point out his rule that doesn't exist explicitly. He's trying to draw a parallel between a wielded shield held while flat-footed and a merged shield that isn't being wielded at all. That isn't a parallel. I'm not even sure how you can justify it as a comparison at all.
==Aelryinth
Treant, you're being situational again.
Not at all. You stated something that was false.
Here's an analogy:
If I say the sky is blue in China and you tell me that I am wrong because the sky is red everywhere, then I don't have to show you a picture of a blue sky in China for your statement to be false - I simply have to show a picture of a blue sky anywhere.
Showing a picture of a blue sky in France doesn't prove the sky in China is blue, but it proves that the sky isn't red everywhere, so once again I have no reason to believe the sky in China isn't blue.
You said that "A shield is both weapon and defense. Unless you can apply both, you don't get the benefit of either."
This is a rule you made up. Furthermore, we don't have to show you that it is wrong when a shield is melded into wildshape to prove you made it up. We just have to show any instance where it is demonstrably false.
This has been done. Yes, it was only one situation - but we only need one situation to show that the rule you made up has no basis in the game.
I believe the point Aelryinth is making is that a shield retains the property of being a weapon-and-defense regardless of the state the wielder is in. If you were to put a shield on a dummy, the shield would still retain the property of being both a weapon-and-defense. Whether it could be used as either at the time is not relevant to his argument.
Of course the shield could also be an improvised dinner plate, or an improvised mirror. But that is irrelevant. The shield is created to be both weapon-and-defense.
In lieu of a perfectly clear ruling; both the interpretations that shields can or cannot be gainfully merged during wildshape must be considered houserules. Thus, Treantmonk should note (?or does note?) in his guide that the houserule he follows is that shields may be gainfully merged.
For what it is worth, since both versions must be considered houserules, I would throw my lot in with the "cannot" crowd on grounds of being more intuitively sensible.
if you would not mind would you explain this in a different way since there seems to be a jump in logic between shields can be used as weapons to shields and wildshape interaction is too unclear.
I'm only trying to argue Aelryinth's point. He's not saying that shields *can* be used as weapons. He's saying that they *are* weapons.
From this argument it follows: since weapons cannot be gainfully merged when wildshaping, neither can shields - since they *are* weapons. Shields do have the property that they can gain the Wild enhancement; which then does allow them to be gainfully merged when wildshaping.
In other words, a dagger is a weapon of type dagger, a shield is a weapon of type shield. No weapon can be gainfully merged when wildshaping - so neither dagger nor shield can be merged. But the rules do make special provision for weapons of type shield which may gain the Wild property to allow them to be gainfully merged.
I'm only trying to argue Aelryinth's point. He's not saying that shields *can* be used as weapons. He's saying that they *are* weapons.
Nobody is saying that shields are not weapons.
Aelryinth was saying that it has both offensive and defensive properties, and if you can't use both, then you can use neither.
Is this also your position?
since weapons cannot be gainfully merged when wildshaping...
If your gear provides a constant bonus (other than an armor bonus) then that bonus continues to apply when you are in wildshape.
Where do you get that if that bonus comes from a weapon there is an exception?
For example - you may have spiked gauntlets, and those spiked gauntlets cannot be used as a weapon when wildshaped - but if those gauntlets happened to have a property where they provide a constant deflection bonus (like a ring of protection) - then that bonus carries forward in wildshape since it's a constant bonus that is not an armor bonus (as per the polymorph rules)
Where do you get that weapons are an exception to the rule?
In lieu of a perfectly clear ruling; both the interpretations that shields can or cannot be gainfully merged during wildshape must be considered houserules. Thus, Treantmonk should note (?or does note?) in his guide that the houserule he follows is that shields may be gainfully merged.
For what it is worth, since both versions must be considered houserules, I would throw my lot in with the "cannot" crowd on grounds of being more intuitively sensible.
In itself a very sensible stand point ;)
If both interpretations were house-rules, I'd opt for the one saying that shield bonuses to AC aren't kept when wild shaping. It's more logical that way, since the shield isn't there anymore. Let's remember that the armor's and shield's special properties are kept, though.
However, the rules as written say that all permanent bonuses are kept with the only exception of "armor bonuses". I think Treantmonk is right in outlining that flaw from the rules, and I think this will be one of the first thing to be errataed. But I haven't seen an official explanation yet.
The polymorph rules also lack some explanation/examples on what bonuses and penalties from armor (and shield) are kept or not. As it is, I can picture a druid wearing a heavy plate armor (made from ironwood) with the Wild enchantment, and none of its penalties (including non-proficiency) would carry over his wildshaped form. Getting a +10 to AC (and no penalty) for a +3 cost is a bit much.
On the house-rule front, I'd also opt for the Wild enchantment to be available for weapons as well as armors/shields, transferring the other weapon's properties to the limb originally carrying it. Otherwise, barring the infamous AoMF, I don't see how even a high-level druid could defeat DR when wildshaped. A +3 cost is high enough for claws to be considered +1 flaming cold iron, for instance.
I don't see how even a high-level druid could defeat DR when wildshaped...
Greater magic fang
I don't see how even a high-level druid could defeat DR when wildshaped...
and amulet of mighty fists
Besides... who needs to overcome DR if you just have a +20 to your damage roll? ;p
I don't see how even a high-level druid could defeat DR when wildshaped...and amulet of mighty fists
Besides... who needs to overcome DR if you just have a +20 to your damage roll? ;p
Trust me. It's a problem. GMF doesn't help overcomming DR good, Cold iron, Silver, etc.
Trust me. It's a problem. GMF doesn't help overcomming DR good, Cold iron, Silver, etc.I don't see how even a high-level druid could defeat DR when wildshaped...and amulet of mighty fists
Besides... who needs to overcome DR if you just have a +20 to your damage roll? ;p
It depends on CL (PRPG p.562).
I also was under the impression that Amulet of Mighty Fists could be "enhanced" with qualities just like weapons can (so you can have a holy, flaming amulet of mighty fists).
I also was under the impression that Amulet of Mighty Fists could be "enhanced" with qualities just like weapons can (so you can have a holy, flaming amulet of mighty fists).
True. And AoMF does not even need to have an enhancement bonus in order to have special weapon abilities.