A simple question, I'd like some opinions on how much a ring of forceshield should cost if I decide to enhance it as a shield.
base price is 4,250 gold
Assuming I enhance this to +2.
I could take the price of a +2 shield enhancement 4,000 gold and add 50% for adding additional powers to an item, ending up with a 10,250 gold item.
I could given it's power treat it roughly as a +2 enhanced shield (4,000 gold) at it's base and enchanting it to +2 would roughly equal the cost of a +4 shield at 16,250 gold.
What do you think would be an appropriate price for this or a shield with slightly different powers, maybe lightning resistance or arrow deflection ?
The 'Bracers of Armour' entry in the main book has the guidlines for the armour equivalent of this, so I'd start there.
I did consider, but the ring takes up the space of a ring and a shield slot effectively, seems bracrs are unduely expensive for an equivalent armor bonus maybe ?
EDIT: actually on closer examination it comes pretty close to the 2nd method I used.
The 'Bracers of Armour' entry in the main book has the guidlines for the armour equivalent of this, so I'd start there.I did consider, but the ring takes up the space of a ring and a shield slot effectively, seems bracrs are unduely expensive for an equivalent armor bonus maybe ?
That's not a defense. Bracers take up the bracer slot and the armor slot effectively.
==Aelryinth
The 'Bracers of Armour' entry in the main book has the guidlines for the armour equivalent of this, so I'd start there.I did consider, but the ring takes up the space of a ring and a shield slot effectively, seems bracrs are unduely expensive for an equivalent armor bonus maybe ?That's not a defense. Bracers take up the bracer slot and the armor slot effectively.
==Aelryinth
It doesnt actually use the body/armor slot though ?
you coud still wear robe or clothes or the like, I think..
|
Bracers of armour essentially cost the same as the bonus they grant (i.e. the base cost is the same as the equivalent bonus cost on Table 15-3 'Shields and Armour'). Caster level to create must be 2x the bonus & must cover any special requirements for special powers. +8 maximum functional bonus.
Ring of Force Shield costs 8,500 for the equivalent of a +2 bonus (normal bonus cost of 4,000), or x2.125 the cost. I'd keep the same maximum functional bonus and caster level requirements as the bracers, but apply this increased cost multiplyer to the ring at each level (and, because it's creating a physical 'shield' shaped force have the basic +2 bonus as the minimum before any 'special' stuff was applied).
So: ring of force +3 = 19,125 gp base cost, +4 = 34,000 gp, etc.. Expensive, but you're opening up some potential 'double-dipping'of defensive powers if the thing gets paired with the more standard bracers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've done this before. After giving it a lot of thought, this is what I arrived at:
1. Anyone can strap a heavy shield onto their arm and get a +2 bonus to their AC (although some classes may need to use a feat to gain proficiency or they will suffer -2 to attack rolls and STR/DEX skill rolls). Spellcasters can still cast spells, even with a heavy steel shield strapped to their arm (arcane casters get a % chance that their spells might fail, but they can still cast them).
2. Since anyone can get the benefits of the Ring of Force Shield for just a tiny expense (a few gold for a basic heavy shield), then the Ring of Force Shield is just a substitute for a basic piece of equipment.
3. But it's a great substitute because it's weightless, invisible, causes no armor check penalties, causes no spell failure, and fits in your pocket whenever you want it to. Further, you don't need proficiency, so you suffer no -2 penalty on attack and skill checks. This is why it's way more expensive than an ordinary heavy shield.
4. All that being said, it's still a basic piece of really neat equipment, and therefore it should be enchantable like the rest of its equipment class. Meaning, any enchantments you can put on a heavy steel shield should be available to a Ring of Force Shield, and they should function the same way (including the cost to enchant them).
In short, you could spend 170 gp for a masterwork heavy steel shield and enchant it with anything in the book that can be applied to a shield, paying the normal listed costs for that enchantment. Or you could spend 8,500 gp for a Ring of Force Shield and enchant it exactly the same way for the same enchantment costs.
So I would say a +2 Ring of Force Shield should cost 12,500 (8,500 + 4,000) market price, or 6,250 to craft one (plus the cost of the masterwork ring).
Did playing it this way end up overpowered?
No, not really.
A sword-n-board fighter would have a magic shield anyway. A +5 Heavy Steel Shield still adds 7 points of Shield bonus to AC, and a +5 Ring of Force Shield also adds 7 points of Shield bonus, so that was a wash. His choice whether to spend 8,330 extra GP for the convenience of an on/off switch and a little less of an armor check penalty.
It was a little better for mages, but still far from overpowered. That's up to 7 AC that most mages don't normally have. However, by the time a mage is running around with a +5 Ring of Force Shield, he probably already had unlimited use of Shield (4 AC and blocks Magic Missiles) anyway (at those levels, 750 GP for a wand of such a useful spell is trivial), so this is really just 3 extra AC, and at those levels, mages have such terrible AC that 3 extra points doesn't change the outcome of many battles.
All in all, I never had a problem with it.
Thanks for your insight guys, I am in the process of upgrading the gear of my players some, mainly by boosting items they already have, but I want to keep it roughly even between them, adding something to the forceshield ring I kinda liked for flavor mostly.
It is for a melee sorcerer by the way (battle sorcerer from 3.5).
I must have misread the price of the forceshield, I'll go with your judgement on this one Blake all-in-all it seems a fair price.
Thanks for your insight guys, I am in the process of upgrading the gear of my players some, mainly by boosting items they already have, but I want to keep it roughly even between them, adding something to the forceshield ring I kinda liked for flavor mostly.
It is for a melee sorcerer by the way (battle sorcerer from 3.5).
I must have misread the price of the forceshield, I'll go with your judgement on this one Blake all-in-all it seems a fair price.
I should note that once I let this geneie out of the bottle, every PC got one. Not because it was overpowered, but because it was cool.
And I had a little run-in with my TWF rogue player. He felt that since this wasn't a real shield, it should give its full AC while he fights with two weapons. But I think I would have had that debate even with a non-enchanted Ring of Force Shield, if he would have thought of it before.
the differance is a sword and board can use a 2 handed weapon and get full shield ac still, which IS really powerful
I still dont see how that works, you dont actively block with it so you dont get AC bonus. *shrugs*
|
The problem with enhancing the ring of force shield with armor/shield enhancement is that it's a ring... and enhancing rings require Forge Ring feat. The costing scheme of rings is different than armors/shields. In the game I run I would be amenable to enhance a ring of force shield but I would ask the player to dig deep and produce something creative using RAW for ring costing...
The problem with enhancing the ring of force shield with armor/shield enhancement is that it's a ring... and enhancing rings require Forge Ring feat. The costing scheme of rings is different than armors/shields. In the game I run I would be amenable to enhance a ring of force shield but I would ask the player to dig deep and produce something creative using RAW for ring costing...
Bracers of armor+2 are effectively equal to leather armor, which anyone can wear with no penalty either, for what, 30 gp?
So cost isn't a factor.
I personally have never seen a way to enchant a force effect with +'s outside of that Gish PrC from WoTC, Abjurant Champion. Basically, he could make it a shield effect +3, or +4, but I'd end up stopping there, as now it's equal to the spell.
Also note that this thing doesn't require proficiency to wield, can't be sundered, etc.
==Aelryinth
|
the differance is a sword and board can use a 2 handed weapon and get full shield ac still, which IS really powerfulI still dont see how that works, you dont actively block with it so you dont get AC bonus. *shrugs*
actually i think it works more like the shield spell, hovering defiantly in the way of enemy blows. No blocking required
|
|
The problem with enhancing the ring of force shield with armor/shield enhancement is that it's a ring... and enhancing rings require Forge Ring feat. The costing scheme of rings is different than armors/shields. In the game I run I would be amenable to enhance a ring of force shield but I would ask the player to dig deep and produce something creative using RAW for ring costing...Bracers of armor+2 are effectively equal to leather armor, which anyone can wear with no penalty either, for what, 30 gp?
So cost isn't a factor.
I personally have never seen a way to enchant a force effect with +'s outside of that Gish PrC from WoTC, Abjurant Champion. Basically, he could make it a shield effect +3, or +4, but I'd end up stopping there, as now it's equal to the spell.
Also note that this thing doesn't require proficiency to wield, can't be sundered, etc.
==Aelryinth
You're right, and this is the point I made. I wouldn't allow my players to do it *easily*. I would not be opposed to allow them to make stronger Rings of Force Shield but they would most likely be extremely expensive. We're talking a shield bonus to AC for casters. Not only that: the caster can turn it off at the beginning of his round, do something that requires two hands, then turn it back on at the end of his turn (free action to turn on/off), which is very powerful in my opinion.
You're right, and this is the point I made. I wouldn't allow my players to do it *easily*. I would not be opposed to allow them to make stronger Rings of Force Shield but they would most likely be extremely expensive. We're talking a shield bonus to AC for casters. Not only that: the caster can turn it off at the beginning of his round, do something that requires two hands, then turn it back on at the end of his turn (free action to turn on/off), which is very powerful in my opinion.The problem with enhancing the ring of force shield with armor/shield enhancement is that it's a ring... and enhancing rings require Forge Ring feat. The costing scheme of rings is different than armors/shields. In the game I run I would be amenable to enhance a ring of force shield but I would ask the player to dig deep and produce something creative using RAW for ring costing...Bracers of armor+2 are effectively equal to leather armor, which anyone can wear with no penalty either, for what, 30 gp?
So cost isn't a factor.
I personally have never seen a way to enchant a force effect with +'s outside of that Gish PrC from WoTC, Abjurant Champion. Basically, he could make it a shield effect +3, or +4, but I'd end up stopping there, as now it's equal to the spell.
Also note that this thing doesn't require proficiency to wield, can't be sundered, etc.
==Aelryinth
It is wielded as an actual shield though and attacking with two weapons or a 2-handed weapon wont give the player a shield bonus, not in my campaign at least. Consider a buckler you got strapped on, you can still attack with two weapons, but you won't get the AC bonus if you do.
actually i think it works more like the shield spell, hovering defiantly in the way of enemy blows. No blocking requiredthe differance is a sword and board can use a 2 handed weapon and get full shield ac still, which IS really powerfulI still dont see how that works, you dont actively block with it so you dont get AC bonus. *shrugs*
Pretty sure it is wielded as a large shield without armor check penalty, and arcane spell failure since the item description says so.
|
|
2. Since anyone can get the benefits of the Ring of Force Shield for just a tiny expense (a few gold for a basic heavy shield), then the Ring of Force Shield is just a substitute for a basic piece of equipment.
While I see your (completely valid) point here, the thing is that the initial question was about a Ring of Force Shield specifically (not a 'shield bonus' item in general), and that isn't just a nifty substitute for a basic heavy shield... it's a small Wall of Force - which brings with it a whole set of other effects to consider:
Immune to Dispel Magic
Hardness 30, Hit Points equal to 20 per caster level (i.e. minimum of 450) - a little better than a heavy metal shield at Hardness 10, Hit Points 20 (and it renews every time you reactivate it)
Breath weapons and spells can't pass through it in either direction
Blocks ethereal creatures
Any and all of which clever PCs are gonna' exploit to their benefit.
However, by the time a mage is running around with a +5 Ring of Force Shield, he probably already had unlimited use of Shield (4 AC and blocks Magic Missiles) anyway (at those levels, 750 GP for a wand of such a useful spell is trivial), so this is really just 3 extra AC, and at those levels, mages have such terrible AC that 3 extra points doesn't change the outcome of many battles.
An item which could produce a Shield spell on a continuous basis, and can be turned on and off, would actually cost 4,000 gp (not the 750 gp for the charged and spell trigger activated wand) as per table 15-29 'use-activated or continuous' spell effects. That would be a +4 Shield bonus you don't need your hands for - so why's it still a lot cheaper than a Ring of Force? Well, I'm guessing that'd be all that Wall of Force stuff I mentioned above.
A +5 Heavy Steel Shield still adds 7 points of Shield bonus to AC, and a +5 Ring of Force Shield also adds 7 points of Shield bonus, so that was a wash.
I'd seriously look at whether allowing a +5 bonus on top of the ring's usual +2 bonus is a good idea. Bracers of Armour grant the 'naked' bonus without any base bonus for physical armour underneath - it's one of their balancing factors: does your fighter want +5 Bracers of Armour for +5 Armour bonus to AC, or +5 Full Plate for a +14 Armour bonus to AC?
If you are looking for an item which simply grants a Shield bonus to AC (whether some of that bonus is used for 'specials' or not) then I'd suggest just building something new from scratch using table 15-29. Your only big concern then is if you count such a thing as an 'Armour bonus' or an 'AC bonus (other)'. Since Shield bonuses don't stack, then I'd say you're probably okay going with the 'Armour bonus' equivalent version (since you're still making your Fighter types choose between your magic item and a more usual shield - enhanced or not - and preventing double-dipping). At the end of the day I guess the cost will be based on how popular or common you want these items to be - the cheaper and better they are, the more are gonna' crop up in your game would (presuming the PCs have anything to say about it).
it's a small Wall of Force - which brings with it a whole set of other effects to consider:
Immune to Dispel Magic
Do you actually give them that? It's one thing to cast the actual Wall of Force. As a wall, it's bigger than the caster. When he puts it between him and something dangerous, it is completely in the way. But this is not the case with a Ring of Force Shield. It makes a really small Wall of Force. Shield-sized. Not enough to hide behind. Remember, a spell only needs a 1-foot hole to have complete line of effect.
Hardness 30, Hit Points equal to 20 per caster level (i.e. minimum of 450) - a little better than a heavy metal shield at Hardness 10, Hit Points 20 (and it renews every time you reactivate it)
Minimum 180 HP. Dunno where you got 450 (unless you added the hardness and HP together and then multipled that sum by 9 levels?). In any case, it would be hardness 30 and 180 HP (unless the CL is higher than 9).
Which really doesn't matter too much. I think in all my 3.0, 3.5, and Pathfinder gaming, I've sundered one shield when I was DMing and I don't remember seeing any shields sundered when I was playing. I don't imagine that comes up very often in anyone's games. Rare as it is, I doubt that is worth the extra 8k you pay for it.
Breath weapons and spells can't pass through it in either direction
Blocks ethereal creatures
No, because it is not a full-sized Wall of Force. It's tiny. Show me the rules that allow you to hide from dragonfire by ducking behind a normal heavy shield. Those are the same rules that apply to ducking behind your Ring of Force Shield.
And for ethereal creatures, it doesn't "block" them. A full-sized Wall of Force blocks them, but this little itty-bitty shield-sized Wall of Force just gives you it's AC bonus against their attacks. Just like a Shield spell, and just like Mage Armor.
Any and all of which clever PCs are gonna' exploit to their benefit.
None of which, actually, except for the Sunder-proof benefit.
An item which could produce a Shield spell on a continuous basis, and can be turned on and off, would actually cost 4,000 gp (not the 750 gp for the charged and spell trigger activated wand) as per table 15-29 'use-activated or continuous' spell effects.
I never said continuous. I only said unlimited access, by which I meant, he could cast it as often as he wants without having to worry about wasting spell slots - even if he uses his own level 1 slots and his own pearls of power, heck, what else is an archmage going to do with those cheesy little level 1 spells?
That would be a +4 Shield bonus you don't need your hands for - so why's it still a lot cheaper than a Ring of Force? Well, I'm guessing that'd be all that Wall of Force stuff I mentioned above.
That doesn't apply.
I'd seriously look at whether allowing a +5 bonus on top of the ring's usual +2 bonus is a good idea. Bracers of Armour grant the 'naked' bonus without any base bonus for physical armour underneath - it's one of their balancing factors: does your fighter want +5 Bracers of Armour for +5 Armour bonus to AC, or +5 Full Plate for a +14 Armour bonus to AC?
I don't understand your point here. Doesn't a fighter want the full plate and a shield bonus too, since they stack? Unless he's using his off-hand to attack, in which case he can't have the shield bonus (unless he's shield bashing with the appropriate feats).
If you are looking for an item which simply grants a Shield bonus to AC (whether some of that bonus is used for 'specials' or not) then I'd suggest just building something new from scratch using table 15-29. Your only big concern then is if you count such a thing as an 'Armour bonus' or an 'AC bonus (other)'. Since Shield bonuses don't stack, then I'd say you're probably okay going with the 'Armour bonus' equivalent version (since you're still making your Fighter types choose between your magic item and a more usual shield - enhanced or not - and preventing double-dipping). At the end of the day I guess the cost will be based on how popular or common you want these items to be - the cheaper and better they are, the more are gonna' crop up in your game would (presuming the PCs have anything to say about it).
Why not just go with a shield bonus? After all, you want it to stack with your armor (just like shields do) and you don't want it to stack with another shield, so it sounds like a shield bonus to me.
It does have some benefits over a mundane shield though, effectively it is a ghost touch shield that can be donned and taken off as a free action, and fancy special effects.
since ghost touch grows more expensive to add to a higher enchanted shield, maybe that should be taken into account somehow ?
might be close to a +1 ghost touch buckler in function.
I think it is important to also consider the nativity of the enhancements and the corresponding cost effects.
I'd say that the force shield still being a shield, the normal shield enhancement costs would apply. (+1 is 1000gp, +2 is 4000gp, etc); however, the force shield is *not* a physical shield but a small wall-of-force effect - this I take to mean that the +2 shield AC granted by the ring is pure enhancement. In other words it would take the cost of a +3 enhancement to increase the ring's shield to +3.
Additionally, I consider the ring an "out of slot" location for native enhancement purposes, meaning a 50% surcharge is required. In total this means that a ring of force shield that grants a total bonus of +3 to AC would be (market price): 8500 (base cost) + 5000 (enhancement cost from +2 to +3) * 150% = 8500 + 5000 * 1.5 = 8500 + 7500 = 16000gp
Or crafted for 8000gp.
I think it is important to also consider the nativity of the enhancements and the corresponding cost effects.
I'd say that the force shield still being a shield, the normal shield enhancement costs would apply. (+1 is 1000gp, +2 is 4000gp, etc); however, the force shield is *not* a physical shield but a small wall-of-force effect - this I take to mean that the +2 shield AC granted by the ring is pure enhancement. In other words it would take the cost of a +3 enhancement to increase the ring's shield to +3.
Additionally, I consider the ring an "out of slot" location for native enhancement purposes, meaning a 50% surcharge is required. In total this means that a ring of force shield that grants a total bonus of +3 to AC would be (market price): 8500 (base cost) + 5000 (enhancement cost from +2 to +3) * 150% = 8500 + 5000 * 1.5 = 8500 + 7500 = 16000gp
Or crafted for 8000gp.
Considering the ring when active still takes up a shield slot and a ring slot to boot I think that is a bit harsh maybe ?
|
|
DM_Blake: I never meant to imply that the wearer of the Ring of Force Shield got all that stuff - that's the stuff the 'shield' itself gets (immune to Dispel Magic, etc.).
It is, however, still very helpful (above and beyond a simple +2 AC bonus). E.g. in most games it's standard practice for spell casters to target 'touch' spell by targeting a guy's shield - thus explaining why the shield bonus to AC doesn't apply Vs touch attacks. If that shield is, in fact, a small Wall of Force then not only does that 'touch spells bypass shields' rule not apply, but the spell - if it does hit the shield - automatically fails to penetrate! And if the caster doesn't realise there's a shield there in the first place, then isn't it reasonable to assume that there's at least as much chance of his spell hitting the shield as there normally would be?
As for not being able to duck behind a shield... well, only a tower shield can be used for full cover, but with a Ring of Force Shield you can do nifty stuff like peer round a corner, or through an opening, through the invisible, spell and breath-weapon-proof, shield and be pretty much immune to counter-attack.
Minimum 180 HP. Dunno where you got 450...
Oops - had a brain fart there... you're totally correct. Still better than a steel shield though. :)
Which really doesn't matter too much. I think in all my 3.0, 3.5, and Pathfinder gaming, I've sundered one shield when I was DMing and I don't remember seeing any shields sundered when I was playing. I don't imagine that comes up very often in anyone's games. Rare as it is, I doubt that is worth the extra 8k you pay for it.
That depends a lot on play styles, of course - but Sundering is an effective tactic used by plenty of people... and it is always an option, even if you personally don't see it used much. But Sundering aside, a high-hardness, high-hit point, totally portable and renewable object has plenty of utility uses as well: from wedging open falling gates to carrying stuff which does continuous damage. There's a lot more to adventuring that just the combat rules, even if a shield is usually seen as part of those rules! ;)
And for ethereal creatures, it doesn't "block" them. A full-sized Wall of Force blocks them, but this little itty-bitty shield-sized Wall of Force just gives you it's AC bonus against their attacks. Just like a Shield spell, and just like Mage Armor.
Well, it's the size of a heavy shield, not a buckler, so I'd not call it 'itty-bitty'... in any case, as Remco points out, you can also use this thing to shield bash ghosts.
I never said continuous. I only said unlimited access, by which I meant, he could cast it as often as he wants without having to worry about wasting spell slots - even if he uses his own level 1 slots and his own pearls of power, heck, what else is an archmage going to do with those cheesy little level 1 spells?
But a non-continuous item with charges which only certain people can use, or even a spell caster's own spells, isn't a fair comparison to a universally usable item like a Ring of Force Shield. Your level 20 Fighter isn't about to start casting Shield spells on himself in most cases. As for what else an archmage would use his level 1 spell slots for... well, if he's gotten to archmage power levels, then I'd hope he'd have figured out a few nice uses by now (and I'd hope he'd not be thinking of them as 'cheesy' either). Again it may be a play style thing - sure, if you're just talking raw, toe-to-toe, combat stats then I see your point, otherwise there's a lot more to using spells in the game than just fighting.
I don't understand your point here. Doesn't a fighter want the full plate and a shield bonus too, since they stack? Unless he's using his off-hand to attack, in which case he can't have the shield bonus (unless he's shield bashing with the appropriate feats).
The point is that a Fighter (for example) has a choice between a +14 AC suit of magical plate armour or a +5 AC set of Bracers of Defense. That sort of choice should, IMHO, carry over to items like the Ring of Force Shield as well - he shouldn't get the base +2 bonus as well as a magical extra +5 bonus for the 'enhanced' Ring of Force Shield, no matter how you design it. He should have to choose - nifty Force Shield of up to +5 (total), or magical heavy shield of up to +7 (total).
Why not just go with a shield bonus? After all, you want it to stack with your armor (just like shields do) and you don't want it to stack with another shield, so it sounds like a shield bonus to me.
If you check the table I referenced, there is no seperate heading for 'Shield bonus' - I was just commenting that when you price a non-shield item which grants a shield bonus you'll have to make the choice of which of the price scales to apply: cheapo armour scale, or more expensive 'anything but armour' scale - it's certainly not a Deflection bonus or a Natural Armour bonus. (The table's on p.550 of the core book if it helps).
I suppose how you price such a thing, in the end, comes down to how you and your players tend to play the game. If you're certain that no-one will ever use this little item as anything more than a +2 bonus to AC, the go right ahead and make it cheap as chips. If your group is more of the sneaky type to get maximum utility out of any item (magical or otherwise) then I'd suggest a price scheme which reflects the increased utility of the item.
|
|
It is wielded as an actual shield though and attacking with two weapons or a 2-handed weapon wont give the player a shield bonus, not in my campaign at least. Consider a buckler you got strapped on, you can still attack with two weapons, but you won't get the AC bonus if you do.
This is where you're wrong. Consider this scenario:
Initiative 22: Enemy fighter shoots arrow, hits AC 21. Wizard wearing ring of force shield is AC 23, so fighter's attack misses.
Initiative 17: Wizard deactivates ring of force shield, loads and shoots crossbow, and reactivates ring of force shield.
Initiative 22: Enemy fighter... etc.
You understand what is happening here right? in effect, it's a shield wielded as a shield yes, but on the character's turn, all drawbacks from normally having a shield go away. This means you can have a rogue with a master dagger thrower build, a two-handed weapon specialist, a composite longbow archer, a duelist, etc... you can have all these guys take full benefit of their "no shield" builds, as if they never saw a shield in their lives, and at the end of their turn, "bong!" the shield is back on as long as you have a free hand (two-handed weapon or bow or double weapon can all be held in one hand in the character's "off time" i.e. when it's not the turn of the character).
I don't know how people can think it's like having a buckler. It's vastly superior to a regular shield.
I don't know how people can think it's like having a buckler. It's vastly superior to a regular shield.
... Except it's much more expensive and can't be enhanced*. As a force effect, it does gain benefits against incorporeal foes, however.
You can get almost the same functionality from a +1 mithral buckler for less than 1/4 the cost (2,015 gp vs. 8,500 gp). You can also enhance the buckler up to +5 for a +6 shield bonus.
*- Although it can be improved, using the "AC bonus (other)" line on Table 15-29 (pg. 550) and applying a 15% reduction (reverse engineered from the original item). I'd probably limit the wall of force effect up to that of a tower shield (+4 AC) at most; even if the effect is weightless, having a "shield... nearly as tall as you are" attached to your arm would get awkward, although I'd allow the ability to gain total cover with a standard action.
|
|
The buckler will impose a -1 penalty to attack to a guy wielding a greatsword... or a weapon in the off-hand...
The buckler's AC bonus also disappears the moment someone makes an attack, so it's basically only good when you're flat-footed.
See the language from the PRPG:
Buckler: This small metal shield is worn strapped to your
forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty
while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield
a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or
using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon),
but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so.
This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting
with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In
any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the
buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a
spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but
you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You
can’t make a shield bash with a buckler.
In short: the buckler is lame in every way imaginable if you compare it to a ring of force shield.
The buckler will impose a -1 penalty to attack to a guy wielding a greatsword... or a weapon in the off-hand...
"Almost the same functionality."
The buckler's AC bonus also disappears the moment someone makes an attack, so it's basically only good when you're flat-footed.
Right, and what makes a ring of force shield different?
An iron band, this simple ring generates a shield-sized (and shield-shaped) wall of force that stays with the ring and can be wielded by the wearer as if it were a heavy shield (+2 AC). This special creation has no armor check penalty or arcane spell failure chance since it is weightless and encumbrance-free. It can be activated and deactivated at will as a free action.
(emphasis mine)
Just being able to activate/deactivate the wall of force effect as a free action doesn't give you the ability to effectively wield it as a shield if you've already used that hand.
You strap a shield to your arm and grip it with your hand. A heavy shield is so heavy you can't use your shield hand for anything else.
This is a basic limitation of the action economy: unless stated otherwise (i.e., Improved Shield Bash), you can't use the same hand to defend with a shield AND do something else. It doesn't matter if you "let go" of your two-handed weapon after your attack, cast spells, etc., you can't use that hand to defend with until your next turn.
You are reading abilities into the item that are not there.
|
|
Just being able to activate/deactivate the wall of force effect as a free action doesn't give you the ability to effectively wield it as a shield if you've already used that hand.
On the contrary. This is exactly what it means. It's like having a glove of storing with a regular shield. Two items in one.
|
|
I'd probably limit the wall of force effect up to that of a tower shield (+4 AC) at most; even if the effect is weightless, having a "shield... nearly as tall as you are" attached to your arm would get awkward, although I'd allow the ability to gain total cover with a standard action.
Slightly off topic, but if you use the Equipment Trick (Shield) Feat from the Adventurer's Armory (p.22-23) and have Escape Artist at 5 ranks or more, you can use the Little Wall trick to turn a total defense action into claiming cover from your (standard) Ring of Force Shield. The Shield Gag trick also suddenly becomes amazing when used against creatures with breath weapons, 'cos your Force Shield is impervious to them (you obviously need to stay with it though, so you may end up hanging off a dragon's snout if you try this!).
Just being able to activate/deactivate the wall of force effect as a free action doesn't give you the ability to effectively wield it as a shield if you've already used that hand.On the contrary. This is exactly what it means. It's like having a glove of storing with a regular shield. Two items in one.
Again, "holding" and using are two different things.
What is the difference between activating/deactivating a wall of force effect as a free action, calling an item from a glove of storing as a free action, or letting go of a weapon with one hand as a free action? Why shouldn't a GM use the specific RAW for a buckler (an item that allows the wearer to use that hand) as the basis for RAI on gloves of storing and rings of force shield? Cite specific rules to back up your position.
Just being able to activate/deactivate the wall of force effect as a free action doesn't give you the ability to effectively wield it as a shield if you've already used that hand.On the contrary. This is exactly what it means. It's like having a glove of storing with a regular shield. Two items in one.Again, "holding" and using are two different things.
What is the difference between activating/deactivating a wall of force effect as a free action, calling an item from a glove of storing as a free action, or letting go of a weapon with one hand as a free action? Why shouldn't a GM use the specific RAW for a buckler (an item that allows the wearer to use that hand) as the basis for RAI on gloves of storing and rings of force shield? Cite specific rules to back up your position.
Ah, but dropping or putting on a shield is a move action, as shields are not merely held, but buckled to the arm AND held (except for the buckler, which is merely buckled).
Ah, but dropping or putting on a shield is a move action, as shields are not merely held, but buckled to the arm AND held (except for the buckler, which is merely buckled).Just being able to activate/deactivate the wall of force effect as a free action doesn't give you the ability to effectively wield it as a shield if you've already used that hand.On the contrary. This is exactly what it means. It's like having a glove of storing with a regular shield. Two items in one.Again, "holding" and using are two different things.
What is the difference between activating/deactivating a wall of force effect as a free action, calling an item from a glove of storing as a free action, or letting go of a weapon with one hand as a free action? Why shouldn't a GM use the specific RAW for a buckler (an item that allows the wearer to use that hand) as the basis for RAI on gloves of storing and rings of force shield? Cite specific rules to back up your position.
Thanks for that.
Now that the glove of storing is out of the way, what I am asking is this: If an item that is never removed (a buckler) is specifically prohibited from being used for defense if that hand is used for something else (even when letting go of a weapon with that hand is a free action), what rule basis is behind allowing a deactivate-use hand-activate-use shield routine with a ring of force shield? Seriously, never removed and requires one free action is not allowed, but deactivate/activate requiring two free actions for basically the same thing should be allowed? BTW, just saying "the rules don't specifically prohibit it" is a cop out when the RAI are pretty clear based on the RAW for the buckler. In fact, the only exception to the "can't use a shield for defense if that hand is doing something else" is a shield bash (and only with a feat).