I'm trying to build a fighter on behalf of someone else, the only requirement really being that they have to fight with a shield. I didn't think it'd be this tough to figure out how it works! I've been pouring through the forums for hours, trying to figure out how to fight with shields, and I don't feel like I've found much clarity.
I'm not sure I can even come up with all the questions necessary to have this all to make sense, but here goes:
Two Weapon Fighting - Can you have a shield in each hand? If so, what does that portend? (More on this in later questions...?)
Shield Master - Is this feat as crazy as I think it is? Can you go all Two Weapon Fighting with Two Spiked Heavy Shields? If you're a Ranger, you can get this feat by level 6 and skip all of its prerequisites. And if you skip getting Two Weapon Fighting, instead of -6/-10, its -0/-0?
Shield Bash - Only able to be done with your off-hand? Or can it be done with the main hand as well?
Bashing Armor Enchantment - Can this be applied Spiked Heavy Shield or what? i.e. 2d6 damage?
Shield Slam - So... Every single time your shield connects, you can bull rush? Can you choose not to? If not, do you end up pushing the targets of your attacks out of your reach? Anyone had problems with this? (Particularly if you're fighting with two shields; if indeed you can fight with two shields and each successful hit indeed triggers a bull rush.)
Quickdraw Shield - Any shenanigans in particular that can be done be equipping/putting this away as a free action? (With the Quickdraw feat) ... useful for the Magus?
...well there's a start. Probably missed something, but oh well. Any and all help with figuring out the subtleties of shield fighting is much appreciated. >.<
To start let's get a clarification.
Does he want to fight using a shield to attack and defend while using another weapon, say a sword.
OR....
Does he just want to go captain america style and fight with nothing but the shield?
To start let's get a clarification.
Does he want to fight using a shield to attack and defend while using another weapon, say a sword.
OR....
Does he just want to go captain america style and fight with nothing but the shield?
Either is fine with her, and may partially depend upon how wielding two shields actually functions.
If it helps, assume Sword and Board?
...and does weapon finesse compliment this style or not so much? (i.e. Rapier and Light Shield)
There is nothing preventing a character from dual-wielding shields just remember you will only gain the AC bonus from one, the off-hand element of shields is simply to indicate the half str bonus to damage with a shield bash. I think you can choose not to do a bull rush with your shield slams.
|
The offhand reference is not there to indicate half strength, it is there in error simply because they made the assumption that MOST people who would use a shield to attack with WOULD be using it as an off-hand one, not a primary one. If you use it as a primary main hand attack it benefits just like any other 1-handed weapon from your full strength bonus.
Shield fighting can be quite effective, especially once you can get shield master. You are correct that you will never take any TWF penalties with a shield, but additionally because of the wording there is NO EFFECT that can cause you to take a penalty to attack when you are attacking with a shield. You can be prone, shaken, demoralized by a court bard, hexxed, and so forth and you will always be attacking at your full bonus. This may not be RAI, but it IS RAW.
I stand Corrected, I'm just glad you didn't try to argue it meant it could only be used in your off-hand, i got tired of that argument a long time ago.
Unless you are a straight rogue, shield fighting is probably the best TWF option nowadays. Maybe if you are playing the variant fighter that gets oversized TWF, using 2x Falcata could be better... but that is a digression here.
With the sword and board ranger variant style, I think for a warrior type, taking a few levels (probably 4-5) of fighter over a ranger's career is very strong. The extra feats are nice to add a few more TWF goodies, and you will want heavy armor prof just to be able to roll with mithral full plate eventually.
I like Heavy shield and short sword, using the short sword as the off-hand attacks once you get shield slam. It is wacky, but fighting w/ 2x heavy shields is pretty strong once you get shield master...
Basically, the character will want STR>DEX>CON>WIS>INT>CHA for stats. In my opinion, Imp. TWF is as far as you need to go, so DEX 17 is sufficient for feat reqs.
The offhand reference is not there to indicate half strength, it is there in error simply because they made the assumption that MOST people who would use a shield to attack with WOULD be using it as an off-hand one, not a primary one. If you use it as a primary main hand attack it benefits just like any other 1-handed weapon from your full strength bonus.
Shield fighting can be quite effective, especially once you can get shield master. You are correct that you will never take any TWF penalties with a shield, but additionally because of the wording there is NO EFFECT that can cause you to take a penalty to attack when you are attacking with a shield. You can be prone, shaken, demoralized by a court bard, hexxed, and so forth and you will always be attacking at your full bonus. This may not be RAI, but it IS RAW.
Wow, didn't realize Shield Master could be THAT cheesy. O_o;
...and thanks for clearing up bashing in the main hand.
Anyone know the final verdict on the Bashing enchantment? Does it not work on a Spiked Heavy Shield?
|
I ws under the impression that the main problem with TWF using a shield was that in RAW you couldnt enchant a shield to function as a magic weapon. So the shield attack would never be able to overcome DR/magic (pretty comum on high lvl mobs). Did they change the rule?
And if you want to TWF a heavy shield you will have to main-hand it. You can only attack with light weapons on the off hand (otherwise you get a huge penality on your roll) unless you pick up the TWF fighter archetype from the APG.
|
Shield fighting can be quite effective, especially once you can get shield master. You are correct that you will never take any TWF penalties with a shield, but additionally because of the wording there is NO EFFECT that can cause you to take a penalty to attack when you are attacking with a shield. You can be prone, shaken, demoralized by a court bard, hexxed, and so forth and you will always be attacking at your full bonus. This may not be RAI, but it IS RAW.
Even if it's RAW, as a GM I would never allow this in my game. So be sure to run such ideas past your GM before planning your entire builds around it.
I can't recall exactly where it was, but I remember one of the devs specifically said that the Bashing enchantment doesn't stack with shield spikes. So you can use the regular (enhanced) shield bash, OR attack with the shield spikes.
Shield fighting can be quite effective, especially once you can get shield master. You are correct that you will never take any TWF penalties with a shield, but additionally because of the wording there is NO EFFECT that can cause you to take a penalty to attack when you are attacking with a shield. You can be prone, shaken, demoralized by a court bard, hexxed, and so forth and you will always be attacking at your full bonus. This may not be RAI, but it IS RAW.Even if it's RAW, as a GM I would never allow this in my game. So be sure to run such ideas past your GM before planning your entire builds around it.
Why not?
|
The offhand reference is not there to indicate half strength, it is there in error simply because they made the assumption that MOST people who would use a shield to attack with WOULD be using it as an off-hand one, not a primary one. If you use it as a primary main hand attack it benefits just like any other 1-handed weapon from your full strength bonus.
Shield fighting can be quite effective, especially once you can get shield master. You are correct that you will never take any TWF penalties with a shield, but additionally because of the wording there is NO EFFECT that can cause you to take a penalty to attack when you are attacking with a shield. You can be prone, shaken, demoralized by a court bard, hexxed, and so forth and you will always be attacking at your full bonus. This may not be RAI, but it IS RAW.
1) You are incorrect. By RAW, any shield bash is an off hand attack so you get 1/2 str. You can not by RAW use two shields to TWF as TWF does not allow one to stack off handed attacks to off handed attacks. By RAI, you maybe correct in that it's an error...but RAW is quite clear that all shield bashes are off handed attacks.,
2) You are correct...by RAW, shield mastery lets one ignore ALL penalties when making a shield bash. By RAI however, it is very likely that this is an oversight and it only should negate the TWF penalty as the shorten summary at the feats lists says.
So you can take RAW and shield bashes are all off handed attacks(so no two shields for you) and that shield mastery lets you ignore all penalty...or take the RAI and you can use shields as primary weapons but shield mastery only lets you ignore TWF penalty. I'm okay with going all RAW or all RAI...but once you pick and choose like you just did...well that is the path of the munchkin, and generally will not be allowed in almost all tables...if not just and outright boot in most cases.
Well, this seems to be dev input contradicting the notion that shield bashes are ALWAYS off-hand attacks. Perhaps they are always off-hand in the sense that they only ever add 1/2STR to DAM, but I couldn't even say that for certain.
Just thought I'd throw that into the mix.
I generally agree with what Cold Napalm is saying re: shield master, and I doubt it was intended to negate the penalty on attacks for being shaken (or stirred, for that matter) as an example, just those related to fighting w/ two weapons and the harsh penalty for the one-handedness of heavy shields and such.
Though, I would disagree on the issue of shield bashes really always being off-hand attacks. That is exactly the same line as was printed in the 3.5 books, and the 3.5 FAQ clearly stated that it was not strictly true and only put that way because they hadn't seriously considered people using a shield as a primary weapon. Clearly not enough Captain America fans there... So, I would argue that it is more of an oversight/uncorrected holdover than anything. That's without bringing in some very reasonable "in reality..." arguments that jumped to mind immediately about historical sword and board fighting styles. :)
|
|
Well, this seems to be dev input contradicting the notion that shield bashes are ALWAYS off-hand attacks. Perhaps they are always off-hand in the sense that they only ever add 1/2STR to DAM, but I couldn't even say that for certain.
Just thought I'd throw that into the mix.
I generally agree with what Cold Napalm is saying re: shield master, and I doubt it was intended to negate the penalty on attacks for being shaken (or stirred, for that matter) as an example, just those related to fighting w/ two weapons and the harsh penalty for the one-handedness of heavy shields and such.
Though, I would disagree on the issue of shield bashes really always being off-hand attacks. That is exactly the same line as was printed in the 3.5 books, and the 3.5 FAQ clearly stated that it was not strictly true and only put that way because they hadn't seriously considered people using a shield as a primary weapon. Clearly not enough Captain America fans there... So, I would argue that it is more of an oversight/uncorrected holdover than anything. That's without bringing in some very reasonable "in reality..." arguments that jumped to mind immediately about historical sword and board fighting styles. :)
And that is fine. Your using RAI all around. Honestly the shield mastery summary is a pretty clear RAI that the it only applies to TWF penalties. What carbon did was take the RAI for shield bash and the RAW for shield mastery to make an uber combo...and that is...problematic.
And that is fine. Your using RAI all around. Honestly the shield mastery summary is a pretty clear RAI that the it only applies to TWF penalties. What carbon did was take the RAI for shield bash and the RAW for shield mastery to make an uber combo...and that is...problematic.Well, this seems to be dev input contradicting the notion that shield bashes are ALWAYS off-hand attacks. Perhaps they are always off-hand in the sense that they only ever add 1/2STR to DAM, but I couldn't even say that for certain.
Just thought I'd throw that into the mix.
I generally agree with what Cold Napalm is saying re: shield master, and I doubt it was intended to negate the penalty on attacks for being shaken (or stirred, for that matter) as an example, just those related to fighting w/ two weapons and the harsh penalty for the one-handedness of heavy shields and such.
Though, I would disagree on the issue of shield bashes really always being off-hand attacks. That is exactly the same line as was printed in the 3.5 books, and the 3.5 FAQ clearly stated that it was not strictly true and only put that way because they hadn't seriously considered people using a shield as a primary weapon. Clearly not enough Captain America fans there... So, I would argue that it is more of an oversight/uncorrected holdover than anything. That's without bringing in some very reasonable "in reality..." arguments that jumped to mind immediately about historical sword and board fighting styles. :)
+1
Plus Im pretty sure that RAW can be read as to require improvised weapon penalties for a primary hand shield.
there is a Gnome shield that has a dagger on the front, i would like a light steel shield with a punching dagger on the front, and use two of them.
So can anyone post some actual fighter builds along these lines? I'd make one but I tend towards the more defensive minded sword and board fighter or alternatively two handers.
|
This subject comes up so often I actually decided to make such a build and compare it to a traditional TWF with DPR calculations. I hope to have it up this weekend. In the meantime, I'll throw this into the discussion:
A serious two-shield fighter is - just like a traditional TWF - going to take double slice (and eventually two-weapon rend) which will eliminate the strength penalty for off-hand attacks.
This subject comes up so often I actually decided to make such a build and compare it to a traditional TWF with DPR calculations. I hope to have it up this weekend. In the meantime, I'll throw this into the discussion:
A serious two-shield fighter is - just like a traditional TWF - going to take double slice (and eventually two-weapon rend) which will eliminate the strength penalty for off-hand attacks.
what if his on hand weapon was a gun buckler?
|
|
And that is fine. Your using RAI all around. Honestly the shield mastery summary is a pretty clear RAI that the it only applies to TWF penalties. What carbon did was take the RAI for shield bash and the RAW for shield mastery to make an uber combo...and that is...problematic.Well, this seems to be dev input contradicting the notion that shield bashes are ALWAYS off-hand attacks. Perhaps they are always off-hand in the sense that they only ever add 1/2STR to DAM, but I couldn't even say that for certain.
Just thought I'd throw that into the mix.
I generally agree with what Cold Napalm is saying re: shield master, and I doubt it was intended to negate the penalty on attacks for being shaken (or stirred, for that matter) as an example, just those related to fighting w/ two weapons and the harsh penalty for the one-handedness of heavy shields and such.
Though, I would disagree on the issue of shield bashes really always being off-hand attacks. That is exactly the same line as was printed in the 3.5 books, and the 3.5 FAQ clearly stated that it was not strictly true and only put that way because they hadn't seriously considered people using a shield as a primary weapon. Clearly not enough Captain America fans there... So, I would argue that it is more of an oversight/uncorrected holdover than anything. That's without bringing in some very reasonable "in reality..." arguments that jumped to mind immediately about historical sword and board fighting styles. :)
The thing is that the line stating that shield attacks can only ever be made as off-hand attacks has been repeatedly clarified as old text holdover from 3.5 and does not currently reflect the intent. While some may try to point to it as stating that is hasn't been set out as "official" errata, I would point out that maybe 10% (and that is being generous) of the little cracks in the system that have been recognized and clarified have been put through the rigor of proper errata, or in text modification.
Shield master and the wording on the other hand has never been addressed as far as I'm able to tell, have seen, or can predict. Simply because of the fact that it is such a weird, high level, feat reliant, and frankly speaking weak build that it isn't worth the breath to speak of it. If anything all it does is make for a cool bit of flavor for a character that wants to strive for it. Imagine a legendary warrior that was known not only for his impenetrable defense, ability to turn this into a formidable (If surprising) offense, and the capability to persevere regardless of the seemingly insurmountable odds and forces against him.
