|
Yes you can. Your GM might think it sounds silly but shields are listed in the weapon table as weapons, so there's no reason you can't wield them just like you do weapons.
Just keep in mind that shield bashing takes a few feats to get good, and TWF is pretty feat intensive as well. Plus, you don't get to apply shield enhancement bonuses to shield bashes unless you enchant them as weapons, in which case the bonus doesn't apply to your AC.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
and most folks you encounter will point and laugh
|
Yes you can. Your GM might think it sounds silly but shields are listed in the weapon table as weapons, so there's no reason you can't wield them just like you do weapons.
Just keep in mind that shield bashing takes a few feats to get good, and TWF is pretty feat intensive as well. Plus, you don't get to apply shield enhancement bonuses to shield bashes unless you enchant them as weapons, in which case the bonus doesn't apply to your AC.
Playing a Human Fighter, not terribly worried about the feats. I figured that only one shield would apply it's bonus and knew that I'd need shield bash. Just wasn't sure if it was legal to begin with.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
there is that...
Absolutely.
You only get the Shield bonus from one. The higher one.
But, isn't it true that if you two-weapon fight with both shields you lose the AC bonus from both of them until your next turn?
|
But, isn't it true that if you two-weapon fight with both shields you lose the AC bonus from both of them until your next turn?Absolutely.
You only get the Shield bonus from one. The higher one.
I meant when you are not attacking.
Improved Shield Bash cure the attacking issue though, but then my statement still applies.
But, isn't it true that if you two-weapon fight with both shields you lose the AC bonus from both of them until your next turn?Absolutely.
You only get the Shield bonus from one. The higher one.
I meant when you are not attacking.
Improved Shield Bash cure the attacking issue though, but then my statement still applies.
I see.
I am going to be willing to be wrong to point out the the Core says off hand only.
You can bash an opponent with a shield, using it as an off-hand weapon. Used this way, a shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon.I would argue that this means you can't use it in both hands.
Where did the PRD say this? I can't find it.
|
|
Where did the PRD say this? I can't find it.I am going to be willing to be wrong to point out the the Core says off hand only.
You can bash an opponent with a shield, using it as an off-hand weapon. Used this way, a shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon.I would argue that this means you can't use it in both hands.
It doesn't.
A Shield is a weapon.
I can be wielded as a primary weapon.
It can be enchanted as a weapon.
There is no off-hand only weapon.
A one handed weapon can be wielded with two hands.
A Heavy Shield, and a Klar is a one-handed weapon.
You can wield a Heavy Shield or Klar with two hands.
|
Where did the PRD say this? I can't find it.I am going to be willing to be wrong to point out the the Core says off hand only.
You can bash an opponent with a shield, using it as an off-hand weapon. Used this way, a shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon.I would argue that this means you can't use it in both hands.
Sorry, I miss quoted. I looked it up in the CRB. on page 152 under shield bash. I get used to quoting the PRD and didn't think about it.
Easier to pull off in real life than a Dire Flail.
Easier but I would think far less effective. At least a three section staff (which is essentually a dire flail in design) is an established weapon in several far eastern martial art styles and is a demonstrably effective weapon.
As for dual shield? I think there was a reason this idea never got very far in real combat througout the ages: They are big, slow, clumsy to use as a primarily offensive weapon and generally were not very lethal, overal, compared to actual weapons. Additionally having big flat boards attached to BOTH arms meant your arm movement was pretty limited and if you started striking high on an opponent your visibilty went to crap since you have this huge panel blocking your eyes as you strike.
You can do it in game. It's just not very effective and burns a ton of feats and cash to make it equivalent to more common weapon and shield combo's.
IMO of course.
|
|
Easier to pull off in real life than a Dire Flail.Easier but I would think far less effective. At least a three section staff (which is essentually a dire flail in design) is an established weapon in several far eastern martial art styles and is a demonstrably effective weapon.
As for dual shield? I think there was a reason this idea never got very far in real combat througout the ages: They are big, slow, clumsy to use as a primarily offensive weapon and generally were not very lethal, overal, compared to actual weapons. Additionally having big flat boards attached to BOTH arms meant your arm movement was pretty limited and if you started striking high on an opponent your visibilty went to crap since you have this huge panel blocking your eyes as you strike.
You can do it in game. It's just not very effective and burns a ton of feats and cash to make it equivalent to more common weapon and shield combo's.
IMO of course.
Well, I'm doing kind of a silly game, so I was trying to think of some funny builds and this one came to mind.
Sorry, I miss quoted. I looked it up in the CRB. on page 152 under shield bash. I get used to quoting the PRD and didn't think about it.Where did the PRD say this? I can't find it.I am going to be willing to be wrong to point out the the Core says off hand only.
You can bash an opponent with a shield, using it as an off-hand weapon. Used this way, a shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon.I would argue that this means you can't use it in both hands.
Ah, I see now. Seems the designers specifically took the "off-hand" language out in the errata.
And, in other news, I've been paying way too much for my bucklers!
Now that'd make one awesome Gorumite, even though he or she might be frowned at for not using a Greatsword.
|
|
Shield Mastery and Greater TWF (and their pre-requisite feats) would let you dual wield two heavy shields without penalty!
And you could enchant each one to +5 for 25k, and they would strike as magic +5 weapons. and you would get six attacks per round at lvl12. And every attack would get a free bull rush, without provoking AoOs, as well as doing damage!
I hate it! It means the frankly ridiculous twin heavy shield wielder is a far, far more effective TWFer than a proper weapon wielder!
Every DM I've played with has explicitly forbidden this (including me). The shield feats (shield bash, shield master, etc) were clearly - at least to my gaming groups - meant to make up for the relative offensive loss of using a shield. It's silly to exploit it and make shields the ultimate of weapons...
|
|
There's also the fact that, if only the higher of the two shield bonuses counts toward your AC, that really defeats much of the purpose of having a second shield over any other kind of weapon. From a purely mechanical standpoint, they're really not that great as weapons.
If you were using two of the same kind of shield, then at least your Weapon Specialization counts for both shields. But a light shield and a heavy shield is definitely something you do for the "hey, check me out" factor.
The only thing you could potentially compare to it is a high crit range weapon, like a scimitar. In which case you are giving up 25,000 gp per weapon (assuming +5), 2 points of attack, 8(!) points of AC, the ability to reflect missiles and rays, etc... for critting more often.
If you think that's a good trade, that's all you.
One way or the other, we play at a strictly no-cheese table, and this certainly falls into that category.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No.
I hate the term "cheese", as the only thing that anyone can agree on it meaning, is something they don't like.
See above video for real world fighting style, using two shields.
A player wants to emulate a real world fighting style, but you say it makes you mad.
Metal Beards man, Metal Beards.
No.
I hate the term "cheese", as the only thing that anyone can agree on it meaning, is something they don't like.See above video for real world fighting style, using two shields.
A player wants to emulate a real world fighting style, but you say it makes you mad.
Metal Beards man, Metal Beards.
Your 1984 video, the one that is always pulled out for the "two shield" threads, is less than impressive. Cheesy, one might say :) This isn't a wide spread viable style with a long and successful history. Youtube isn't exactly a reliable source. And, to be blunt, if it worked it would be more widespread / visible than a clip on Youtube. While I know there is a "fantasy" in FRPG some things are just too... cheesy :D Sorry couldn't resist. But buried among all this "cheese" is a viable real life criticism. Success breeds imitation and spreads a style. This one hasn't any significant historical or current following in the martial arts. And while this is a "fantasy" game and requires rules for many things that don't exist in real life, the rules should give a passing nod to the things that do exist in real life. Imo, of course.
Of course, the metal beard is cheesy too... and any number of other things allowed by the RAW game rules or someone's interpretation of them. So, have at it, two shields and all.
|
|
On the one hand, I agree with BBT-- a shield is a large, solid piece of wood and metal, and anyone who's ever lashed one to his arm should understand how effective it could be as a bashing weapon.
On the other hand, dual wielding them not only conflicts with the classic image of the medieval warrior, who wields sword as weapon and shield as armor, but in game terms it's sub-par as well.
The main advantage to making your shield your main weapon is that you get the AC bonus of a shield and the benefits of a weapon in that hand. Thus you can TWF and still carry a shield, or you can have the shield, have a weapon, and still keep a hand free for spellcasting if you're a cleric or whatnot.
But if you can't get the AC bonus from both your shields at once, then there's really no mechanical benefit to choosing another shield as your second weapon. Shields don't do particularly impressive damage, their crit range is weak, and their weapon and armor enchantments don't stack. If they're both the same kind of shield, then you at least get to apply Weapon Focus to both of them at once, but a heavy shield and a light shield is really only good if you think it's a cool idea.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Plot & Poison (a Green Ronin 3.X product that was well-enough received that Paizo has adapted two of it's Prestige Classes, the Dominant and the Submissive, to use in the Rise of the Runelords anniversary edition) had feats and a fighting style for two-shield fighting.
It's not something that was used much in real-life, video aside, but certainly as relevant to a fantasy game as the two-bladed sword, the orcish double axe, the spiked chain, the gnomish hooked hammer, the dwarven urgrosh, etc. all of which are weapons that were also not terribly common in medieval warfare.
And yeah, the less said about the 3.X hair blades, or PF's bladed beard or the battle ladder or the ripsaw glaive, the better. The existence of PF weapons many times more absurd than two-shield fighting doesn't make two-shield fighting any more palatable, IMO.
If it exists in *your* games, it would be something most likely to appear first in gladiatoral exhibitions (which are all about the 'rule of cool' and would include similarly not-terribly-effective-but-awesome-looking things like flaming battle poi* and people using whips and nets and stuff).
The other place a two-shield style would be likely to develop would be among the Shoanti (using Klar, a shield/weapon combination that *screams* to be used in pairs) or the Gnomes of 3.X (with the Gnomish Tortoise Blade, which is, essentially, a pre-Pathfinder Klar).
*Not to be mistaken with flaming battle koi which are a CR 5 encounter in their native environment.
|
|
On the one hand, I agree with BBT-- a shield is a large, solid piece of wood and metal, and anyone who's ever lashed one to his arm should understand how effective it could be as a bashing weapon.
On the other hand, dual wielding them not only conflicts with the classic image of the medieval warrior, who wields sword as weapon and shield as armor, but in game terms it's sub-par as well.
The main advantage to making your shield your main weapon is that you get the AC bonus of a shield and the benefits of a weapon in that hand. Thus you can TWF and still carry a shield, or you can have the shield, have a weapon, and still keep a hand free for spellcasting if you're a cleric or whatnot.
But if you can't get the AC bonus from both your shields at once, then there's really no mechanical benefit to choosing another shield as your second weapon. Shields don't do particularly impressive damage, their crit range is weak, and their weapon and armor enchantments don't stack. If they're both the same kind of shield, then you at least get to apply Weapon Focus to both of them at once, but a heavy shield and a light shield is really only good if you think it's a cool idea.
It's nice for feat/weapon training economy as a sword and board TWF fighter to use two light shields. I don't think you don't get to apply both shield bonuses, at least as far as Hero Lab calculates it, so it's not really exploitative. Finally, as has already been pointed out, compared to some of the other options in pathfinder two light shields borders on the sane.
|
|
And you could enchant each one to +5 for 25k, and they would strike as magic +5 weapons. and you would get six attacks per round at lvl12. And every attack would get a free bull rush, without provoking AoOs, as well as doing damage!
I hate it! It means the frankly ridiculous twin heavy shield wielder is a far, far more effective TWFer than a proper weapon wielder!
You realize that the enhancement bonus as a shield doesn't automatically get applied to attack and damage rolls too. They have to pay to have it enchanted separately as a weapon as well (putting the price of a +5 defense and +5 offense shield at 75k).
Shields: Shield enhancement bonuses stack with armor enhancement bonuses. Shield enhancement bonuses do not act as attack or damage bonuses when the shield is used in a shield bash. The bashing special ability, however, does grant a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls (see the special ability description).
A shield could be built that also acted as a magic weapon, but the cost of the enhancement bonus on attack rolls would need to be added into the cost of the shield and its enhancement bonus to AC.
|
|
And you could enchant each one to +5 for 25k, and they would strike as magic +5 weapons. and you would get six attacks per round at lvl12. And every attack would get a free bull rush, without provoking AoOs, as well as doing damage!
I hate it! It means the frankly ridiculous twin heavy shield wielder is a far, far more effective TWFer than a proper weapon wielder!
You realize that the enhancement bonus as a shield doesn't automatically get applied to attack and damage rolls too. They have to pay to have it enchanted separately as a weapon as well (putting the price of a +5 defense and +5 offense shield at 75k).
Shields: Shield enhancement bonuses stack with armor enhancement bonuses. Shield enhancement bonuses do not act as attack or damage bonuses when the shield is used in a shield bash. The bashing special ability, however, does grant a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls (see the special ability description).
A shield could be built that also acted as a magic weapon, but the cost of the enhancement bonus on attack rolls would need to be added into the cost of the shield and its enhancement bonus to AC.
Once you have 11 BAB you can invalidate that requirement with Shield Master.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shield Master:-
Benefit: You do not suffer any penalties on attack rolls made with a shield while you are wielding another weapon. Add your shield's enhancement bonus to attacks and damage rolls made with the shield as if it were a weapon enhancement bonus.
So, let's compare two options: +5 longsword and +5 heavy shield, and two +5 heavy shields.
For both, one shield (only) provides +7 to AC. A heavy shield is a one-handed weapon, so for TWF purposes there is a -4 attack penalty for both weapons.
The Shield Master feat lets you ignore this attack attack penalty for the shield, but not the sword, so assuming the shield is the off-hand weapon you attack at -4/0 with sword and shield, but 0/0 with two shields!
Enchanting a shield to +5 costs 25k (shield enhancement, not weapon enhancement), giving a sword a weapon enhancement costs 50k. But Shield Master lets you use the shield enhancement as a weapon enhancement bonus! So two +5 heavy shields costs 50,340gp while one of those and a +5 longsword costs 75,485gp. The twin shielder has an extra 25,145gp to spend!
Don't forget that every attack with a shield is also a free bull rush (on top of the damage) that does not provoke an AoO, as Shield Slam is a pre-req for Shield Master. The twin shielder gets three more bull rushes than the sword and boarder.
Apart from the absurdity (and in a world of strap-on metal beards that's not too much of a problem), what bothers me is that there are no feats that reduce the TWF penalties to zero for any weapon except a shield!
Once you get your head around this, why would you choose any other TWF combination?
Something is broken.
BTW, when the BBEG says he's just going to get his strap-on so he can really do you some damage, you better hope he's talking about the barbezu beard...!
I am glad that they removed the "off-hand only" wording from shield bash. However, shields are still not treated as real weapons.
I think this thread has adequately proven that one can dual wield shields, but my problem is that one can't really single wield shields.
Almost every good shield feat has TWF as a prereq. I understand that shield bash attacks are most often off-hand attacks made by sword 'n boarders, but shields are lethal weapons in their own right and should be treated as such.
As always, ask your GM. Some will allow it, some will not. Rules loopholing be damned.
Rangers can skip the annoying feat prereqs if they go "Sword and Shield" combat style, but otherwise, yeah, it's lame.
I'd really love to do a Cleric or Inquisitor that two-hands a Heavy shield and leaves an offhand open for casting, but no way I'm wasting all those feats to do it.
Kindly also keep in mind that you can really leverage Shield Master if you want to.
Classic Uber Shield:
+5 Spiked SHield of Bashing, +5 Defender, used by a SHield Master.
Devote the Weapon Enhancement to all Defending.
You still have a +5 Weapon, because Shield Master uses the Shield Enhancement, not the Weapon Enhancement.
You get: 2-12 dmg Weapon 20/x2, +7 Shield AC, +5 Defender AC, +5 Weapon.
Price, 100k. And you've still got 200 Gp and +10 of assorted enhancements to play around with.
==Aelryinth