Buckler Use


Rules Questions

Liberty's Edge

18 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Pg 150 of Core Rules states no penalty to bows when buckler is being "carried".

Can I assume Rules As Intended (RAI) that "Carried" means - "using the buckler for it's intended purpose" and not a literal translation of "carrying it somewhere somehow among your person?"

That being said - why is it that you can use a bow w/o penalty that clearly requires both hands/arms when using a bow, but when wielding a off-hand dirk or two handed claymore, it suddenly gets in the way - not only penalizing your attack roll, but robbing your AC bonus for the remainder of the round.

I'm not against penalizing the melee person in this case - I'm more concerned with NOT penalizing the archer who is already protected from most harm (usually) by choosing ranged combat.

Robert


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Oh boy, this again. Sigh.... I've been hoping for a direct yes/no answer from the creators for over a year on this issue. Most people still say no, because giving the already powerful archers a shield bonus makes them even more frustrating to deal with.


I don't think it would cause a penalty to hit, but it would not confer it's AC bonus in the round that said archer fired the bow.


Robert Brambley wrote:


That being said - why is it that you can use a bow w/o penalty that clearly requires both hands/arms when using a bow, but when wielding a off-hand dirk or two handed claymore, it suddenly gets in the way

Because it doesn't really get in the way of a bow, it just sits there on your arm. In melee, you're swinging the arm around and the buckler is kind of in the way.

Buckler hand wielding a mele weapon: -1 to attack rolls
Buckler hand helping wield a two-handed melee weapon: -1 to attack rolls
Buckler hand helping wield a bow or crossbow: no penalty

Use buckler hand to attack, help attack, or cast a spell (Includes ranged attacks): lose AC bonus


Robert Brambley wrote:

Pg 150 of Core Rules states no penalty to bows when buckler is being "carried".

Can I assume Rules As Intended (RAI) that "Carried" means - "using the buckler for it's intended purpose" and not a literal translation of "carrying it somewhere somehow among your person?"

That being said - why is it that you can use a bow w/o penalty that clearly requires both hands/arms when using a bow, but when wielding a off-hand dirk or two handed claymore, it suddenly gets in the way - not only penalizing your attack roll, but robbing your AC bonus for the remainder of the round.

I'm not against penalizing the melee person in this case - I'm more concerned with NOT penalizing the archer who is already protected from most harm (usually) by choosing ranged combat.

Robert

This debate has been going on for years. I would suggest pressing the FAQ button.


I just find it funny that the "D&D/Pathfinder" buckler is worn on the arm. The real-world buckler is held in the hand and actively moved around to parry attacks. It's just an alternative to a main-gauche.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Since this thread will most likely involve an impassioned debate in which most people on each side haven't even read the text of the buckler, let's go ahead and make it too convenient to ignore:

Buckler wrote:
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.

So here's the breakdown:

• Sentence #1: Description
• Sentence #2: No penalty to bow/crossbow use while carrying a buckler.
• Sentences #3-4: Take -1 to attacks involving buckler arm.
• Sentence #5: "In any case," using a weapon with the buckler arm costs you the shield bonus to AC.
• Sentence #6: Casting with buckler arm costs you the shield bonus to AC.
• Sentence #7: No shield-bashing.


Jiggy wrote:

Since this thread will most likely involve an impassioned debate in which most people on each side haven't even read the text of the buckler, let's go ahead and make it too convenient to ignore:

Buckler wrote:
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.

So here's the breakdown:

• Sentence #1: Description
• Sentence #2: No penalty to bow/crossbow use while carrying a buckler.
• Sentences #3-4: Take -1 to attacks involving buckler arm.
• Sentence #5: "In any case," using a weapon with the buckler arm costs you the shield bonus to AC.
• Sentence #6: Casting with buckler arm costs you the shield bonus to AC.
• Sentence #7: No shield-bashing.

While I agree with your interpretation I disagree that most people have not read it. They just seem to disagree with us.

OP: As for why the buckler bonus is not kept during combat, that makes sense, but the -1 to attacks should not be there IMHO since the loss of the shield bonus to AC should have been enough of a penalty.


Would reloading a 1 handed firearm cause you to lose the ac bonus from a buckler?


Some Random Dood wrote:
Would reloading a 1 handed firearm cause you to lose the ac bonus from a buckler?

No, but using the weapon to attack would. Loading the weapon does not count as using the weapon.


wraithstrike wrote:
Some Random Dood wrote:
Would reloading a 1 handed firearm cause you to lose the ac bonus from a buckler?
No, but using the weapon to attack would. Loading the weapon does not count as using the weapon.

If it's a 1 handed weapon, why would attacking cause you to lose the ac bonus from the buckler?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Some Random Dood wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Some Random Dood wrote:
Would reloading a 1 handed firearm cause you to lose the ac bonus from a buckler?
No, but using the weapon to attack would. Loading the weapon does not count as using the weapon.
If it's a 1 handed weapon, why would attacking cause you to lose the ac bonus from the buckler?

He means using it in the hand with the buckler.


Jiggy wrote:
Some Random Dood wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Some Random Dood wrote:
Would reloading a 1 handed firearm cause you to lose the ac bonus from a buckler?
No, but using the weapon to attack would. Loading the weapon does not count as using the weapon.
If it's a 1 handed weapon, why would attacking cause you to lose the ac bonus from the buckler?
He means using it in the hand with the buckler.

Ah, of course. But since it's 1 handed shouldn't it be assumed it would be used in the hand without the buckler?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Some Random Dood wrote:
But since it's 1 handed shouldn't it be assumed it would be used in the hand without the buckler?

Typically, yes.


Some Random Dood wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Some Random Dood wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Some Random Dood wrote:
Would reloading a 1 handed firearm cause you to lose the ac bonus from a buckler?
No, but using the weapon to attack would. Loading the weapon does not count as using the weapon.
If it's a 1 handed weapon, why would attacking cause you to lose the ac bonus from the buckler?
He means using it in the hand with the buckler.
Ah, of course. But since it's 1 handed shouldn't it be assumed it would be used in the hand without the buckler?

Yes. I was mostly stating that for emphasis. Some people have tried to TWF with crossbows which is possible, but would incur the penalty if it was tried.


wraithstrike wrote:
Yes. I was mostly stating that for emphasis. Some people have tried to TWF with crossbows which is possible, but would incur the penalty if it was tried.

Yes, of course. If the arm/hand wielding the buckler is used for attacking or casting anything, you lose the ac from the buckler until your next turn.

Liberty's Edge

Jiggy wrote:


So here's the breakdown:

• Sentence #1: Description
• Sentence #2: No penalty to bow/crossbow use while carrying a buckler.
• Sentences #3-4: Take -1 to attacks involving buckler arm.
• Sentence #5: "In any case," using a weapon with the buckler arm costs you the shield bonus to AC.
• Sentence #6: Casting with buckler arm costs you the shield bonus to AC.
• Sentence #7: No shield-bashing.

So Jiggy - is it your position that 'no penalty while carrying buckler' is literally "carrying" and not intended to mean "while wielding a buckler for its intended purpose" - engaged in combat?

So you're saying that so long as he's carrying it, no penalty, but as soon as an archer uses a bow, he's no longer "carrying" said buckler he's now engaged in activity where the buckler would be "used". AND if said archer fires his bow, he IS penalized in both of the following ways:
1) loses buckler bonus to AC for that round (until his next turn)
2) Has -1 to Ranged attack rolls

Is this what you're understanding is?

I ask because to my eyes, the second sentence is pretty clear:
"This small metal shield is worn strapped to your
forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty
while carrying it."

Provided "carrying" means wearing it for its intended purposes - then you don't have the -1 to attacks, but later the "In any case you lose the AC if you attack" seems to apply to all previously discussed scenarios: bows, Two-Weapon, Two-Handed styles, off-handed, spellcasting etc..

Robert


Robert Brambley wrote:
Jiggy wrote:


So here's the breakdown:

• Sentence #1: Description
• Sentence #2: No penalty to bow/crossbow use while carrying a buckler.
• Sentences #3-4: Take -1 to attacks involving buckler arm.
• Sentence #5: "In any case," using a weapon with the buckler arm costs you the shield bonus to AC.
• Sentence #6: Casting with buckler arm costs you the shield bonus to AC.
• Sentence #7: No shield-bashing.

So Jiggy - is it your position that 'no penalty while carrying buckler' is literally "carrying" and not intended to mean "while wielding a buckler for its intended purpose" - engaged in combat?

So you're saying that so long as he's carrying it, no penalty, but as soon as an archer uses a bow, he's no longer "carrying" said buckler he's now engaged in activity where the buckler would be "used". AND if said archer fires his bow, he IS penalized in both of the following ways:
1) loses buckler bonus to AC for that round (until his next turn)
2) Has -1 to Ranged attack rolls

Is this what you're understanding is?

I ask because to my eyes, the second sentence is pretty clear:
"This small metal shield is worn strapped to your
forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty
while carrying it."

Provided "carrying" means wearing it for its intended purposes - then you don't have the -1 to attacks, but later the "In any case you lose the AC if you attack" seems to apply to all previously discussed scenarios: bows, Two-Weapon, Two-Handed styles, off-handed, spellcasting etc..

Robert

I believe that is what Jiggy is advocating and that's exactly how I read it too. Frankly, I would probably rule that the buckler is light enough to not cause the penalty to attacks, but as written I think it is fairly clear.

Liberty's Edge

hgsolo wrote:

I believe that is what Jiggy is advocating and that's exactly how I read it too. Frankly, I would probably rule that the buckler is light enough to not cause the penalty to attacks, but as written I think it is fairly clear.

And I agree it SHOULD be that way - you SHOULD be penalized a -1 to attacks (with a bow).

But I can't see that the wording in the buckler descriptions supports this.

To me - it clearly says you can use bow w/o penalty.

Unless "carrying" really means literally carrying in a non-functional capacity - like stowed in a back pack or around your belt or something

Robert

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I was merely providing and then sorting the rules text, not professing my own interpretation.

My interpretation is thus:

First, the buckler text is referring to when you have the buckler actually equipped. No other non-magical item in the entire game gives you any sort of penalty just for having it stowed on your person (barring encumbrance by weight), so to think the buckler would have a specific rule to state this (when nothing else does) would be ludicrous. The use of "carry" must therefore mean something else, and the only reasonable interpretation remaining is that you have it equipped in the manner for which it is designed.

With that in mind, the line about attacking with a bow at no penalty means exactly that: no penalty. This line and the line following (about the -1 when attacking using that hand) are in a sense "twins". The paragraph gives you Case A and Case B (using bows and using other weapons, respectively) and tells you the difference between them: no penalty for A, penalty for B. It then groups them together with the next line (beginning with "in any case") to inform us that in Cases A and B, you lose the buckler's shield bonus to AC. (Followed by the sentence basically saying "and spells too".)

Thus, it seems the idea is that anything using your buckler arm costs you the AC bonus because the arm is not free to defend. However, only activities that involve needing to move that arm around quickly will incur a -1 to attack rolls; the buckler will encumber your sword strike as you try to swing your arm around, but doesn't really inhibit your ability to hold your arm steady while you draw back a bowstring with the other hand.


It looks like one of those pseudo-simulationist things from 3rd edition.
There were archers and light troops that used small shields strapped to their arms (that may fall in the category of the D&D buckler), of course it is useless when you fire at the enemy, because the shield is facing to the wrong direction. For a D&D archer that is almost always firing proyectiles it would be stupid to suffer a -1 to attack just to get an AC bonus the day he fights in melee. However 0 penalties means that every archer should have a buckler worn, which isn't realist at all. Somebody actually practicing archery could tell us if that kind of protection is such a problem for an archer.

And yes, I think that the archer doesn't suffer any -1 penalty to attack while carrying a buckler, exception > broader rule (and otherwise the "You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it" sentence would be useless). But you don't get the benefits of the shield (no exception for archery).


I fight in a Dagorhir chapter and i arch most of the time. While not a fan of shooting my bow while wearing a shield strapped to my arm, i have not noticed it affecting my shooting in any capacity. The only hindrance it provides is it cuts down on the peripheral vision to the left.

Thats just me though, others may see it differently.

Liberty's Edge

Jiggy wrote:


Thus, it seems the idea is that anything using your buckler arm costs you the AC bonus because the arm is not free to defend. However, only activities that involve needing to move that arm around quickly will incur a -1 to attack rolls; the buckler will encumber your sword strike as you try to swing your arm around, but doesn't really inhibit your ability to hold your arm steady while you draw back a bowstring with the other hand.

So I know you're not officially a rep of Paizo or a Sage Advice column but let me ask you this, too:

Does the above quote text ALSO apply to wielding a two-handed weapon such as a great sword?

Or does the text in the buckler description that said this NOT apply to greatsword wielders?

"If you use weapon in your off-hand you lose all AC bonuses from the buckler until your next turn"

In other words, is using a two handed weapon considered to be "using a weapon in your off-hand?"

Or is "using a weapon in your off-hand" only in cases where you're clearly wielding a weapon completely in that hand as is the case w/ two-weapon wielders? and two-handed style is merely "helping wield a weapon" and thus not applicable to this AC loss????

Forgive me for wanting to be specific: I'm not intentionally being obtuse; I have a rules lawyer....and when i say lawyer, I literally mean hes a couple months from taking the Barr exam.....whom I need to ensure we're both 100% clear on the facets of this rule as we currently disagree with the rules as intended.

Thanks.
Robert

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Robert Brambley wrote:
Jiggy wrote:


Thus, it seems the idea is that anything using your buckler arm costs you the AC bonus because the arm is not free to defend. However, only activities that involve needing to move that arm around quickly will incur a -1 to attack rolls; the buckler will encumber your sword strike as you try to swing your arm around, but doesn't really inhibit your ability to hold your arm steady while you draw back a bowstring with the other hand.

So I know you're not officially a rep of Paizo or a Sage Advice column but let me ask you this, too:

Does the above quote text ALSO apply to wielding a two-handed weapon such as a great sword?

Or does the text in the buckler description that said this NOT apply to greatsword wielders?

"If you use weapon in your off-hand you lose all AC bonuses from the buckler until your next turn"

In other words, is using a two handed weapon considered to be "using a weapon in your off-hand?"

Or is "using a weapon in your off-hand" only in cases where you're clearly wielding a weapon completely in that hand as is the case w/ two-weapon wielders? and two-handed style is merely "helping wield a weapon" and thus not applicable to this AC loss????

Forgive me for wanting to be specific: I'm not intentionally being obtuse; I have a rules lawyer....and when i say lawyer, I literally mean hes a couple months from taking the Barr exam.....whom I need to ensure we're both 100% clear on the facets of this rule as we currently disagree with the rules as intended.

Thanks.
Robert

Buckler wrote:
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.

Using a two-handed weapon and using a one-handed weapon in the buckler hand are listed together, and also both fall within the "In any case" range.


Robert Brambley wrote:
hgsolo wrote:

I believe that is what Jiggy is advocating and that's exactly how I read it too. Frankly, I would probably rule that the buckler is light enough to not cause the penalty to attacks, but as written I think it is fairly clear.

And I agree it SHOULD be that way - you SHOULD be penalized a -1 to attacks (with a bow).

But I can't see that the wording in the buckler descriptions supports this.

To me - it clearly says you can use bow w/o penalty.

Unless "carrying" really means literally carrying in a non-functional capacity - like stowed in a back pack or around your belt or something

Robert

Scratch that, it wasn't as clear as I thought. Jiggy in his later post has the right idea. No penalty to attack with bows, penalty on melee when using something in the hand that has the buckler (off-hand weapon or two hander), both lose AC bonus. I was saying that in my games I would simply handwave the penalty to attacks for melee.


I hate to point this out, but in 10+ years this has never been resolved.

The Buckler is a misnamed shield (a targe most likely). See Weren Wu Jen's post above about a buckler being a small parrying shield. Someone thought buckler was Buckled to the arm, it was a liguistic snafu.

The 3.0 guys let it slip in as a shield for archers, specifically. It had a bunch of silly rules attached. Silly in this case, only providing it's shield bonus to ONE adjacent opponent. You lost AC if you used the hand for anything other than defense. It carried a penalty on TWF and two handed weapons; both of which got big power ups in the conversion from 2.0 to 3.0. Archers stayed somewhat static in the conversion.

Paizo simplified the buckler with PFRPG, dropping the one adjacent thing but kept it as is. This was so as not to confuse the players who had come to accept the term buckler as a shield that is straped on, but not held. They actually made this an easier item to use.

There is a feat that keeps the TWF types from losing the AC bonus .

This is jut one of the little things in the game that gets half of the people really riled up.

If this bugs you, just house rule it.

*Call it something different (if the misnaming gets you)

*Drop the attack penalty (if that seems dumb to you) OR make it an armor check penalty; That way it goes away with masterwork, mithral and magical versions of the item. This way you can apply it equally to ranged and melee without ticking off any players.

*Make archers lose the AC bonus on rounds when they shoot a bow (this you will find only matters when someone shoots back or makes a move to base after the archers turn is up), so not really worth while.

*carried is worn, on the arm, as it makes no sense to stow an item designed to keep your hands free. You might but its a fringe case.


Pst! Zag!

I can't speak for 3.0, but in 3.5 the buckler functioned the same way it does in Pathfinder.


Yep Im gonna stop mixing the internet and Blaackberry Witbier.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Buckler Use All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.