Ok screwed up my last post so I will readers digest condensed versions thing.
A player wants one.
Do the spikes cost 1260gp as per weapon rules, are the mithril as part of the shield cost, or do they cost more like 510 which is half the heavy shield cost since adding spikes is normall 10 gp, ie half the heavy shield cost.
Also Since these occupy a strange double position as both armor and shield would it be "unbalancing" the let these count as a light weapon for two weapon fighting. The character plans to take the shield bash feats as well.
Advice?
Ok screwed up my last post so I will readers digest condensed versions thing.
A player wants one.Do the spikes cost 1260gp as per weapon rules, are the mithril as part of the shield cost, or do they cost more like 510 which is half the heavy shield cost since adding spikes is normall 10 gp, ie half the heavy shield cost.
Also Since these occupy a strange double position as both armor and shield would it be "unbalancing" the let these count as a light weapon for two weapon fighting. The character plans to take the shield bash feats as well.
Advice?
The shield and the spikes are considered separate as far as weight, cost, and materials are concerned.
You could rule that a mithral shield is a light weapon (even if it is a heavy shield) and it wouldn't be really unbalancing, but it would definitely be a house rule.
You could rule that a mithral shield is a light weapon (even if it is a heavy shield) and it wouldn't be really unbalancing, until the shield gains the bashing ability and is used by a character designed around shield bashing/TWF.
Fixed that for you. 2d6 damage for an off-hand weapon is a bit much if it's treated as a light weapon for TWF purposes, especially when you're not losing the AC benefit (Improved Shield Bash).
In another thread, it was noted that the shield spikes are a weapon, and the bashing only affects the shield (as it's a shield enhancement), so your shield bash would become 1d8 as a "light" weapon, which isn't quite as nasty as 2d6 (if you started from spiked heavy shield stats).
Basically, it'd be like having an exotic weapon (longsword has 1d8/1d8 and the offhand counts as light).
As stated by others, the shield is treated as a shield and the spikes are treated as a separate weapon. So making the spikes out of mithril would cost the 1260gp.
I know the dangers as I have a 7th level fighter in my group who has gone down the shield bash route.
Be very careful about what you allow with shields, technically (if you wanted to be a rules lawyer) a shield is counted as an off hand weapon, with all the limitations that this implies. I decided to be nice to my player and allow him to use it as a primary weapon, which has an effect on how he can apply his Strength and Power Attack to damage mainly.
He now rarely uses a weapon in his primary hand and relies on smashing my poor innocent monsters repeatedly in the face and bull rushing them around the field of combat. God help the poor buggers if he catches them with their back to a wall as they end up prone more often than not.
With a shield of bashing, power attack, Weapon Focus, Weapon Training, Weapon Specialisation and the host of shield available feats a fighter using a shield can start to become as dangerous as two handed weapon fighter with a better AC. Yes his damage will be lower, but he gets a whole lot of extra abilities thrown in.
So in a nutshell, I would advise you to stick to the rules on what size weapon the shield is, but would allow them to use it as a primary weapon if they wished. If you do start allowing Mithril shields to be classed as a size lighter when used as a weapon, at some point someone is going to want to know why his mithril longsword is not counted as a light weapon, or why he can't use his mithril two handed sword in one hand as a medium weapon.
Kaisoku is also correct about bashing, it is an armour enhancement and is applied to the shield and not the spikes. Although you can see that the damage is actually only 1d6 for a light shield and 1d8 for a heavy shield.
Bashing:
In another thread, it was noted that the shield spikes are a weapon, and the bashing only affects the shield (as it's a shield enhancement), so your shield bash would become 1d8 as a "light" weapon, which isn't quite as nasty as 2d6 (if you started from spiked heavy shield stats).
Note that in Pathfinder RPG, shield spikes have changed slightly from the 3.5 version:
Shield Spikes: These spikes turn a shield into a martial piercing weapon and increase the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger than you... Otherwise, attacking with a spiked shield is like making a shield bash attack.
The spikes increase the damage category of the shield, instead of doing a set amount as if it were its own weapon type. The only other difference from a regular shield is that you can have a masterwork weapon bonus, as well as weapon enhancement bonuses and special abilities on the spikes (which you otherwise can't do with a shield, except in a very limited fashion from the bashing ability and the Shield Master feat).
Bashing: A shield with this special ability is designed to perform a shield bash. A bashing shield deals damage as if it were a weapon of two size categories larger (a Medium light shield thus deals 1d6 points of damage and a Medium heavy shield deals 1d8 points of damage).
Because the spikes and the bashing ability are from different causes, they stack under the stacking rules. According to Table 6-5 on pg. 145, a 1d8 weapon one size category larger increases to 2d6 damage.
A +X bashing heavy spiked shield does do 2d6+1 damage before any other modifiers.
I would argue that they are both size increases, so they overlap and not stack.
Unless you are happy for a player to run around doing 2d6 damage with an off hand weapon as soon as he is entitled to a +2 piece of armour.
So in a nutshell, I would advise you to stick to the rules on what size weapon the shield is, but would allow them to use it as a primary weapon if they wished. If you do start allowing Mithril shields to be classed as a size lighter when used as a weapon, at some point someone is going to want to know why his mithril longsword is not counted as a light weapon, or why he can't use his mithril two handed sword in one hand as a medium weapon.
This is the reason I would likely not allow it. I'm a fan of internally consistant rules, and wouldn't like the implications that this might allow.
.
@Dragonchess Player
The wording hasn't changed between 3.5e and Pathfinder. There's just a space in the PRD now where you ommitted this line:
"An enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but a spiked shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right."
This is the same in both versions, and is why your shield bashing enhancement (which applies to shields) cannot enhance the shield spikes.
They combine and are treated as a shield 3 sizes larger. This was covered in the 3.5 FAQ and the wording hasn't changed with Pathfinder, both the spikes and the Bashing quality improve the 'shield bash'. So a spiked heavy shield with Bashing does 2d6 base damage.Which is more damage than any other 1-handed weapon, which is not really the intent of the ability. Especially since shield spikes are weapons. And the bashing quality is an armor quality; it's meant to be put on a shield, not a weapon.
It's certainly an issue that needs to be cleared up in the FAQ (which we made strides toward getting done last week). In any case, if a GM is fine with someone basically getting 2H weapon damage with one hand for a mere 9,000 gp, I guess that's fine.
From another thread on the subject, boy this has been brought up a lot, lets hope the FAQ clears it up once and for all.
I would argue that they are both size increases, so they overlap and not stack.
They are both untyped.
Unless you are happy for a player to run around doing 2d6 damage with an off hand weapon as soon as he is entitled to a +2 piece of armour.
Since heavy shields are one-handed weapons, they take a -4/-4 to primary/off-hand attack rolls with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat. I'm OK with that, since characters are better off with a +1 bashing spiked light shield doing 1d8+1 damage and only taking -2/-2 on attack rolls.
What I'm not OK with is treating a mithral heavy shield as if it were a light weapon. That makes them unbalanced.
The wording hasn't changed between 3.5e and Pathfinder. There's just a space in the PRD now where you ommitted this line:
"An enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but a spiked shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right."
This is the same in both versions, and is why your shield bashing enhancement (which applies to shields) cannot enhance the shield spikes.
It says "enhancement bonus" not "armor/shield ability." Enhancement bonuses are the "+X" that add to the AC granted by a shield. I didn't include it because it wasn't relevant to the damage increase. The bashing ability grants an enhancement bonus (+1) to a shield bash as one of its properties, in addition to increasing the damage, anyway.
The only reason for that sentence is to enforce the separation between the enhancement bonus for defense (shield bonus) and offense (weapon bonus). This is especially important because armor/shield enhancement bonuses are less costly than weapon enhancement bonuses.
From another thread on the subject, boy this has been brought up a lot, lets hope the FAQ clears it up once and for all.They combine and are treated as a shield 3 sizes larger. This was covered in the 3.5 FAQ and the wording hasn't changed with Pathfinder, both the spikes and the Bashing quality improve the 'shield bash'. So a spiked heavy shield with Bashing does 2d6 base damage.Which is more damage than any other 1-handed weapon, which is not really the intent of the ability. Especially since shield spikes are weapons. And the bashing quality is an armor quality; it's meant to be put on a shield, not a weapon.
It's certainly an issue that needs to be cleared up in the FAQ (which we made strides toward getting done last week). In any case, if a GM is fine with someone basically getting 2H weapon damage with one hand for a mere 9,000 gp, I guess that's fine.
Meh.
Sure they can do 2d6 damage with one hand, but they're 20/x2 on critical hits and aren't designed to be used two-handed, which puts them behind the heavy pick, scimitar, or most two-handed weapons (with Power Attack), since full BAB classes can take Improved Critical around the same time (8th level). Heck, the kukri TWF fighter does comparable damage.
As I mentioned above, attempting to use a heavy spiked shield for TWF imposes -4/-4 on attack rolls, so it's not good at that either.
For the sake of a bit of rules lawyering, would you enforce the line where it states that shields used to bash are an off handed weapon?
1) If you do, then the 2d6+(1 bashing)+(half strength)+(power attack)+(weapon specialisation)(+weapon training) is going to do about 2d6+4 as an off hand weapon, assuming the fighter doesn't power attack because he is already losing 4 off the attack from wielding two medium weapons and has 16 strength. Lets also say he is 5th level and chose the close group for weapon training.
2) If you do not, then the same fighter could designate the shield as his primary attack, put a light weapon in his now off hand and do 2d6+11 (again assuming all the same bonuses and levels, but he is now using 2 points of power attack)
Worse still is if he decides that he is only going to use a shield as his weapon of choice all the time, then he isn't even getting the minuses. This becomes a bigger problem at 11th level when he gets shield mastery.
I am mostly curious about this, as I have put a couple of house rules in place in my game as I have a player who was trying the old two shields as weapons route.
My only other question on the matter is, if bashing can be applied to light and heavy shields, but you allow it to be applied to spiked shields. Why does it list Spiked Shields separately in the fighters weapon groups? They are either the same or they are not, but that particular list chooses to define them as different weapons, all be it in the same group. Again, purely argumentative as I have made up my mind how to handle the rules in my game but I am interested to see how others rule on the matter.
[edit: Just for the record, we only use pathfinder core rulebook and a few house rules, for our own entertainment.]
For the sake of a bit of rules lawyering, would you enforce the line where it states that shields used to bash are an off handed weapon?
Yes. This keeps them at a reasonable level of effectiveness, compared to other options; otherwise they are too powerful.
My only other question on the matter is, if bashing can be applied to light and heavy shields, but you allow it to be applied to spiked shields. Why does it list Spiked Shields separately in the fighters weapon groups? They are either the same or they are not, but that particular list chooses to define them as different weapons, all be it in the same group. Again, purely argumentative as I have made up my mind how to handle the rules in my game but I am interested to see how others rule on the matter.
Shields without spikes do bludgeoning damage, spiked shields do piercing damage. That's more of a difference than normal bows vs. composite bows, which are also listed separately but are specifically treated as the same weapon for the purpose of proficiency, Weapon Focus, etc. In the case of both shields and bows, there's no real difference in how you use them, only in the weapon properties. Composite bows are bows specifically made to apply Str bonuses to damage, while spiked shields are just shields with spikes added to their outer surface.
Well, in checking the 3.5e FAQ, it states that it counts as 3 stages upgrading damage, and it says that you can use the shield bash as a primary weapon (causing any other weapon used to be your secondary/offhand attack).
So they were a-ok with 2d6 20/x2 one-handed weapon. Oh well.
I guess it's time to make a shield bashing Fighter that takes advantage of the Vital Strike line... or why not two shields of bashing! It's not restricted to offhand only!
TWF with two 2d6 damage weapons! Stand aside Monk... I've got the base damage now, and cheaper weapon enhancements to boot!
...
/sigh
So in a nutshell, I would advise you to stick to the rules on what size weapon the shield is, but would allow them to use it as a primary weapon if they wished. If you do start allowing Mithril shields to be classed as a size lighter when used as a weapon, at some point someone is going to want to know why his mithril longsword is not counted as a light weapon, or why he can't use his mithril two handed sword in one hand as a medium weapon.
Well to that one I would point out the lines about how mithril affects armor. Thats the crux of my quandary. The spiked shield occupies this strange location as both shield and [edit]weapon. Where as say, a longsword, is just a weapon.
Away thats to all who posted with advice. The character in question is a two weapon ranger, but point out how it COULD be abused by other players in the future (I know this one wouldn't come up with the crazy optimized high damaged builds), I will err on the side of caution. Though I still don't know if i think mithril shield spikes are worth the cost by RAW. Nice to know I have been correct in basing cost on weight as a mithril item not a normal item. I'll keep watching the thread to see what else other people say. I need to make better use of the search engines somehow. I figured the issue had been raised but could find out where.
Final questions on the subject.
Would you allow some one to attack with an shield bash if that was his only attack that round, say for example he had charged?
If you allowed it, would you make them take the two weapon penalties and off hand penalties on this to hit roll and damage, even though they are not two handed attacking that round.
In a nut shell how would you handle the fighter who wanted his shield to be his primary weapon.
The reason for the 20 questions are to get a different persons take on the rules. In my current campaign, one of the players really wanted to explore all the rules on shields. I managed to convince him that he couldn't use two shields, as he wanted to get a double bonus from his fighter training. He also wanted to use a light weapon to limit his two weapon penalties, in this case a dagger. His aim was to have his shield as his primary attack every round, sometimes two weapon fighting, but most of the time not even using the dagger. As I stated, I house ruled a nice compromise, but I am always interested in another take on it.