|
Can't comment on the Shield Mastery numbers, but I can tell you that no, you cannot move your 4th iterative attack from your main hand to your offhand. You have to have Greater TWF for the third attack with your shield. At least I think that was the consensus the last time we argued about the order of TWF attacks.
|
Can't comment on the Shield Mastery numbers, but I can tell you that no, you cannot move your 4th iterative attack from your main hand to your offhand. You have to have Greater TWF for the third attack with your shield. At least I think that was the consensus the last time we argued about the order of TWF attacks.
Although I believe you could just call the shield your main hand weapon and use the Long Sword as your off hand. Don't see any reason why this wouldn't work... It makes sense if you are better with your shield to be attacking with it more anyways.
Edit: Stupid Ninjas...... although the Long sword would be at -4 if the shield is a heavy shield I believe
Normally you choose which hand is primary, but I think shields are always offhand:
Shield Bash: "You can bash an opponent with a [light/heavy] shield, using it as an off-hand weapon"
Here's a question:
Shield Master: "You do not suffer any penalties on attack rolls made with a shield while you are wielding another weapon."
So wouldn't you not only remove the TWF penalty from the Shield Bash, but also remove the -5 from the second ITWF attack?
Longsword primary: (BAB -4 for TWF w/heavy offhand)
+16/+11/+6/+1
Heavy Shield secondary: (no penalties, full Str bonus)
+20/+20
Longsword primary: (BAB -2 for TWF w/light offhand)
+18/+13/+8/+3
Light Shield secondary: (no penalties, full Str bonus)
+20/+20
Plus shield enhancement bonus and all the other fighter stuff.
There was a thread about a month ago about shields and TWF and I asked the same question. Every TWF would take a shield if they could get off hand attacks with no penalty. It would be way to broken. So what I got from the thread and what was discussed was that with shield mastery, u always treat ur shield as ur main hand weapon when invoking TWF.
I shouldn't be wrong, but just like with my other posts in the forums, this may get some criticism. But that's what I came to as the conclussion is that ur shield is always ur main hand weapon when using TWF.
I think I understand this, but I would like to double check with the paizo community. So here are a few of my questions:
At say... level 20, if I were TWF with a longsword/shield combo, and had the Imp. TWF feat, then my attack line would look like this (if we are only looking at BAB of course) - +20, +20, +15, +15, +10, +5
Add in Shield Mastery and the Penalty for TWF, I am looking at +18, +20, +13, +15, +8, +3 because the attacks used with my main hand (longsword) would still have the TWF penalties even though Shield mastery takes them off of the shield. And obviously once you throw the other feats and enhancements and stuff those numbers change, but at the base is that the correct way to figure them up?
Also, with a full round action, and TWF, can I only take two attacks with my off-hand? The Double Slice feat makes it so that my offhand is often as good as my main if not better in some instances, and I was wondering if I could use my shield bash for say.. the last attack in that line. My line would then change to +18, +20, +13, +15, +8, +5 and I would have 3 attacks with my longsword, and 3 with my shield.
I know on page 187 it says in the full attack rules, that: "If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first." Makes me think you can use either your primary or your off-hand and it doesn't matter, but I wasn't quite sure, so I come seeking clarification.
With TWF, ITWF and a Longsword/Shield combo your BAB would look more like: +16/+16/+11/+11/+6/+1 due to the fact that Shield Slam attacks treat the shield as a "one-handed weapon" not a light weapon. So on the TWF chart in combat that is -4 to all attacks instead of the standard -2 when you are using a light off-handed weapon.
With Shield Mastery it apparently would look like: +16/+20/+11/+15/+6/+1 because while you suffer no penalties for attacks with the shield any longer, the feat doesn't seem to change the fact that you treat it as a one-handed weapon. So, according to the TWF chart you still suffer -4 on your attacks. The feat is just negating that penalty for your shield strikes. A DM might call that the feat also reduces the penalties for your main hand weapon, but that is up to the DM, it doesn't seem to be the case by what is written in the feats.
There was a thread about a month ago about shields and TWF and I asked the same question. Every TWF would take a shield if they could get off hand attacks with no penalty. It would be way to broken. So what I got from the thread and what was discussed was that with shield mastery, u always treat ur shield as ur main hand weapon when invoking TWF.
I shouldn't be wrong, but just like with my other posts in the forums, this may get some criticism. But that's what I came to as the conclussion is that ur shield is always ur main hand weapon when using TWF.
As far as I know you have always been able to decide which your main hand/weapon was. I wouldn't let players continually switch their main hand, but if a Player wanted to build this kind of Fighter I would allow them to use the Shield in their main hand. I think that is actually pretty accurate to the way soldiers would use the shield in combat anyway. In that case your attacks would look like: +20/+16/+15/+11/+10/+5 with the shield being your main weapon. The build would use a shield to bludgeon their opponent’s defense until an opening appeared and only then would use a few quick jabs or slashes with a sword to exploit those openings.
Some good visual examples would be in the TV series ROME. In the fights where the soldiers are using shields this seems to be the way they do business. It would work well.
::EDIT:: Then if you decided to go Shield and Shortsword like the Romans and others did, your attacks would be: +20/+18/+15/+13/+10/+5 and I think that would be quite accurate to that type of build. Then specialize with Shortsowrds and carry an extra in case you lose your shield.
due to the fact that Shield Slam attacks treat the shield as a "one-handed weapon" not a light weapon.
I don't see this restriction specified on Shield Slam : a light shield is considred a light weapon for shield slam attacks. Are you sure ??
due to the fact that Shield Slam attacks treat the shield as a "one-handed weapon" not a light weapon.I don't see this restriction specified on Shield Slam : a light shield is considred a light weapon for shield slam attacks. Are you sure ??
My mistake, I only saw the entry for Heavy Shields. You are correct that the Light Shield would be used as a light weapon. I didn't see the second Shield Slam entry for Light Shields. In that case you could use a Longsword in your main hand and then the light shield in the off hand and still get the: +20/+18/+15/+13/+10/+5 attack numbers. Or alternatively you could use a Heavy Shield in your main hand and a Shortsword in your off hand and gain the: +20/+18/+15/+13/+10/+5 attack numbers that way. Two excellent concepts and very good builds.
In that case you could use a Longsword in your main hand and then the light shield in the off hand and still get the: +20/+18/+15/+13/+10/+5 attack numbers.
How do you figure?
I'm assuming you're interlacing the attacks (shield sword shield sword sword sword) but those last two sword attacks are still at -2 due to TWF.
The longsword should be +18/+13/+8/+3 and the light shield +20/+15 (depending on your interpretation of Shield Master)
Or alternatively you could use a Heavy Shield in your main hand and a Shortsword in your off hand and gain the: +20/+18/+15/+13/+10/+5 attack numbers that way.
If it's house ruled that Shield Bash can be main hand attacks, and you're interlacing attacks again (Shield sword shield sword shield shield) then those numbers are right.
It would be much easier to read if you guys would break up your two weapons.
In that case you could use a Longsword in your main hand and then the light shield in the off hand and still get the: +20/+18/+15/+13/+10/+5 attack numbers.How do you figure?
I'm assuming you're interlacing the attacks (shield sword shield sword sword sword) but those last two sword attacks are still at -2 due to TWF.
The longsword should be +18/+13/+8/+3 and the light shield +20/+15 (depending on your interpretation of Shield Master)
Yes, again my mistake, I got hasty and just copy/pasted. I was interlacing the attacks and forgot to change the last two.
Or alternatively you could use a Heavy Shield in your main hand and a Shortsword in your off hand and gain the: +20/+18/+15/+13/+10/+5 attack numbers that way.If it's house ruled that Shield Bash can be main hand attacks, and you're interlacing attacks again (Shield sword shield sword shield shield) then those numbers are right.
It would be much easier to read if you guys would break up your two weapons.
I was going with what Fnipernackle said in his post above. Normally you can specify which weapon will be your primary and secondary. Or rather you can specify which hand is you’re primary and secondary. Normally I would not see why this wouldn't hold true for TWF with a Shield. I don't see any real reason not to allow it. But I did read more carefully through the Shield Bash entry again and noticed something I didn't take note of before:
Shield Bash Attacks: You can bash an opponent with a heavy shield, using it as an off-hand weapon. See “shield, heavy” on Table: Weapons for the damage dealt by a shield bash. Used this way, a heavy shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon. For the purpose of penalties on attack rolls, treat a heavy shield as a one-handed weapon. If you use your shield as a weapon, you lose its AC bonus until your next turn. An enhancement bonus on a shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but the shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.
The highlighted part does seem to specifically restrict the Shield to the off-hand.
Though this seems to be the sticking point, does the shield have to be an off-hand even though the TWF entry says:
on page 187 it says in the full attack rules, that: "If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first."Makes me think you can use either weapon as your first attack, but whichever one you use for your first attack will be your main hand for that round. At least that is how I read those entries...
IMO: Using it first doesn't change it from an off-hand weapon. It just means you can either:
Sword/Sword/Sword/Sword then Shield/Shield,or
Shield/Shield then Sword/Sword/Sword/Sword.
Each weapon going in descending BAB-bonus order.
Full Attack: If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first.
There was a thread about a month ago about shields and TWF and I asked the same question. Every TWF would take a shield if they could get off hand attacks with no penalty. It would be way to broken. So what I got from the thread and what was discussed was that with shield mastery, u always treat ur shield as ur main hand weapon when invoking TWF.
I shouldn't be wrong, but just like with my other posts in the forums, this may get some criticism. But that's what I came to as the conclussion is that ur shield is always ur main hand weapon when using TWF.
Can you please post a link to this thread.
Can you please post a link to this thread.
You can click on someone's name to browse a list of their recent posts.
Fnipernackle is probably referring to Odd thing with Shield Master in which nothing is really resolved except some house rules and a reference to James possibly wanting Shields to not be off-hand only but no citation.
To muddy the waters further:
If you have a longsword in your right hand and a shield in your left, and you only attack with a shield bash in a round, that shield bash is NOT considered an off-hand or secondary attack for that round.
This specifically applies to only making a single attack in a round, not using TWF, and is in response to a thread about handedness. However, it is one example of a Shield not being specifically limited to off-hand attacks. I still think it's off-hand only when using TWF/ITWF or benefiting from Shield Master.
Ah, I see. Thanks for putting those links up there.
The only rule allowing a shield to be used as a weapon at all specifically limits it to an off-hand weapon. By RAW, I believe that a shield is always an off-hand attack, whether you TWF or not.
IMO: Using it first doesn't change it from an off-hand weapon. It just means you can either:
Sword/Sword/Sword/Sword then Shield/Shield,
or
Shield/Shield then Sword/Sword/Sword/Sword.Each weapon going in descending BAB-bonus order.
Full Attack: If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first.
I interpret the "If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first" as meaning that you don't have to strike with your main hand when you have 2 attacks at the same bonus.
Your attacks can be :
Sword+Shield/Sword+Shield/Sword/Sword
or
Shield+Sword/Shield+Sword/Sword/Sword
or
Sword+Shield/Shield+Sword/Sword/Sword
etc ...
I interpret the "If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first" as meaning that you don't have to strike with your main hand when you have 2 attacks at the same bonus.
My reasoning is that the restriction (Must be in order of bonus) only applies to multiple attacks from high BAB (Iterative attacks). So your offhand attack(s) which don't rely on BAB can be before or after your main hand iterative attacks, same with the extra attack from Haste.
Pedantic, yes, but it makes so much more sense (personally) to roll all your main hand attacks together, instead of interlacing them and going back and forth with different bonuses, rolling different weapon dice and applying different weapon effects, strength modifiers, etc.
The thing I don't like about the feat is that it gives the same "no penalty" for a light or heavy shield as written. IMHO it should be modified so the light shield has no penalty, and the heavy shield is at a -2 since it is a normal sized weapon in the off-hand. I thought that was the intent, but the feat does not read that way.
The thing I don't like about the feat is that it gives the same "no penalty" for a light or heavy shield as written. IMHO it should be modified so the light shield has no penalty, and the heavy shield is at a -2 since it is a normal sized weapon in the off-hand. I thought that was the intent, but the feat does not read that way.IMHO the intent was to use the shield as the off-hand weapon, thus the -2/-4 distinction wasn't necessary (because the primary weapon suffers the penalty -2 or -4 penalty).
At least I would say that the designer didn't take in mind a build with the shield as the primary weapon.
The thing is that the size of the off-hand weapons determines the penalty of the TWF. Having a heavy shield will give a bigger penalty than a light shield(light weapon), without the feat that is.