I've been playing a halfling axe and board fighter for two levels now, but the more he sees combat, the more verisimilitude weakens for me. I just can't seem to rationalize away the durability of his "heavy" wooden shield, which is every bit as effective as its medium counterpart, but only weighs one half the amount.
How is it that it is not shattered every time it is pitted against the metal weapons of medium creatures?
I know the game is abstract and simplified, but being able to rationalize certain things makes the game more fun for me.
Please help me come up with something that makes sense and rationalizes this problem away.
|
I've been playing a halfling axe and board fighter for two levels now, but the more he sees combat, the more verisimilitude weakens for me. I just can't seem to rationalize away the durability of his "heavy" wooden shield, which is every bit as effective as its medium counterpart, but only weighs one half the amount.
How is it that it is not shattered every time it is pitted against the metal weapons of medium creatures?
I know the game is abstract and simplified, but being able to rationalize certain things makes the game more fun for me.
Please help me come up with something that makes sense and rationalizes this problem away.
The thickness of the shield is the same, the weight reduction comes from the lessened area. In fact, given the same thickness, the greater surface area of a shield larger in diameter should make it more flimsy than a more compact design.
Most wooden shields had a metal boss and rim (but not necessarily facing). The way to block with a shield doesn't actually inflict much damage to a shield (unless you are blocking a strong piercing weapon).
The thickness of the shield is the same, the weight reduction comes from the lessened area. In fact, given the same thickness, the greater surface area of a shield larger in diameter should make it more flimsy than a more compact design.
I imagined a proportional change for all dimensions. This actually does make sense. Especially since halflings are, pound for pound, stronger than larger folk.
Most wooden shields had a metal boss and rim (but not necessarily facing). The way to block with a shield doesn't actually inflict much damage to a shield (unless you are blocking a strong piercing weapon).I dunno, a morningstar should tear up a wooden shield pretty good.
It would be blocked by the boss, which is usually very solid metal. Blocking it with the wooden portion (the facing) would result in no shield.
I imagined a proportional change for all dimensions. This actually does make sense. Especially since halflings are, pound for pound, stronger than larger folk.
A proportional change in all dimensions would be 1/8 of the weight. Dimensions would be x 79.37% at 1/2 weight.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know it is not the answer that you are looking for, but it is a game mechanic of a fantasy game.
The truth of the matter is that if you go to one of the many SCA or other fighting groups, there are a lot of broken shields and arms (real arms, not weapons) regardless of the size and strength of the shield.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The truth of the matter is that if you go to one of the many SCA or other fighting groups, there are a lot of broken shields and arms (real arms, not weapons) regardless of the size and strength of the shield.
I wouldn't say a lot of arms, but yeah, it can happen. So can dislocated elbows.
How does a human's wooden shield stand up to metal weapons of large creatures? Or Huge ones, for that matter?
Make no mistake, I was wondering that as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How is it that it is not shattered every time it is pitted against the metal weapons of medium creatures?
Because it is not made simply of balsa wood and glue? It is made of hard woods and (usually) reinforced with a metal binding and often a metal center cap?
Go find an actual small wooden buckler crafted by an actual shield maker and bang on it a bith with a sword and I doubt you would ask the question.
Wooden bucklers and targe's were used for ages as defense and while yes they eventually broke from damage over time, they would not have been so widely use in reality if they broke from a swing or two.
Add on top of that the fact that your halfling exists in a world where magic can reinforce nearly anything and they get stronger still.
That said, it should not be a problem to think they can carry a usable shield if you have ever actually handled an actual wooden buckler or targe.
Lastly, swords are actually pretty bad at hacking apart hard woods, hence why axes are used to cut timber and why most shields have a metal rim to counter the one area a sword cut could doeasier damage to a shield.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The simple answer is that the game is an abstraction. It doesn't model weapon/shield/armor damage except on explicit Sunder attempts. And a few saving throw cases.
Which is good. I really don't want to have to handle weapons and armor breaking or explicitly repairing gear after fights. Too much extra rolling/bookkeeping for too little benefit.
I agree wholeheartedly.
A decade or so ago, I helped play-test a homebrewed miniatures wargame called Bandits & Heroes that had a mechanic where weapons and armor were damaged by combat. Part of the tactical decision was wehter or not any given fight would be econimically worthwhile. In other words... Would the treasure gained be enough to cover the repairs to armor and weapons that would be the result of the fight?
Ultimately, my feedback after several sessions was that this mechanic, while adding verisimilitude, made the game less fun. You had to do a cost-benefit analysis based on insufficient data before every battle.
(The fighting part of the game was actually pretty good, and overall, I liked it. I know that it was published briefly, but the publisher went out of business not long after. I've never actually seen a professionally-produced copy of the rules.)
I think the PFRPG abstraction gets it right.
Add on top of that the fact that your halfling exists in a world where magic can reinforce nearly anything and they get stronger still.
I'm assuming non-magical materials for the purposes of this discussion.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Make no mistake, I was wondering that as well.How does a human's wooden shield stand up to metal weapons of large creatures? Or Huge ones, for that matter?
Firstly, a well-made shield is a composite: Wooden base, covered with cowhide, edged with steel and with a steel boss in the centre. The result is very strong and above all, very flexible - it bends to absorb the impact of a blow.
Secondly, you don't block flat with it, you use it to deflect attacks so they glance off the shield at an angle. That way the shield avoids damage and the user avoids getting hurt.
Just to be clear, most classes get proficiency, not the feat.
If the latter were true, then it would have various rules ramifications, like fighters being able to switch out said bonus feats for others at certain levels.
THEY. ARE. NOT. FEATS.
They are free proficiencies.
Well, maybe the Halfling doesn't use the shield to completely absorb the impact, but to redirect its force away from the Halfling's body.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you watch someone actually using a shield (SCA or otherwise) you'll find that the shield survives NOT by being struck like a door stuck in the frame but rather by being something the weapon hits to deflect it.
That is to say- the shield isn't a wall. Its a moving object to deflect the weapon coming at it. You strike the shield and it moves your weapon away. The shield isn't taking "a hit" like you would use your weapon to strike the door to sunder it.
This is why the shield doesn't take damage unless you are aiming to damage it. The same reason the opponents weapon doesn't take damage unless you aim to damge it.
An axe readily sunders a block of wood. Chop some wood and try it out- its tiring but hardily difficult. Using that same axe against a piece of wood strapped to someone's arm though is an entirely different affair.
-S
|
THEY. ARE. NOT. FEATS.
They are free proficiencies.
Proficiency or feat, it is still the same thing. People of certain classes have the training to use shields effectively in combat. Whether they gained that proficiency by learning their class or they took a proficiency feat for it, it still means that they have taken some training to learn how to use the shield in combat.
I think the abstraction notion is probably the most important element here. It comes down to a matter of realism vs playability. As Haladir sort of pointed out, it would slow down game a bit if we were to calculate damage to weapons & armor with each hit.
It might be fun, as a house rule or optional rule, have weapons made of wood (or other "more brittle than steel") be automatically sundered by harder weapons wielded by larger creatures.
While I can't see that being very "fun" in a typical Pathfinder game, a bronze age game (which UC added rules for) might really benefit of that.
Things like wicker shields actually did have some staying power-however they DID break if they meet with a bronze or steel weapon.
Also, if we are going that far- why not armor repair in general for non-magic armor? There are plenty of historical writings about how a knight should fight AFTER his shield was busted/broken. (It was kind of assumed)
I always like to look at games like this as a story rather than a "game". Would the heroes shield break when the mighty troll swung his club down upon him? If it's dramatic- hell yes! If not, a wizard did it.
PS: As a SCA shield fighter myself I agree- block with the corners. If you block strait on/flat- even with a war door your gonna have HURT'EN forearm in the morning :-)
Proficiency or feat, it is still the same thing.THEY. ARE. NOT. FEATS.
They are free proficiencies.
That's ONLY true insofar as the benefit gained. But claiming it's a feat (which it isn't) has other ramifications, namely any mechanic that effects feats.
I've been playing a halfling axe and board fighter for two levels now, but the more he sees combat, the more verisimilitude weakens for me. I just can't seem to rationalize away the durability of his "heavy" wooden shield, which is every bit as effective as its medium counterpart, but only weighs one half the amount.
How is it that it is not shattered every time it is pitted against the metal weapons of medium creatures?
I know the game is abstract and simplified, but being able to rationalize certain things makes the game more fun for me.
Please help me come up with something that makes sense and rationalizes this problem away.
Well wooden shields are used to deflect and parry blows and not take the full brunt of the hit (footwork is about diminishing their attack and accelerating yours), if you take something straight on, down or in, even a normal axe can break them real quick no matter the size. Since it is just treated wood and axes chop down trees, lol.
Small shields will be far more used to catch and parry. Hand to hand has multiple attack lines, angles, points of momentum and each attack has weak points. Less holding the shield and taking everything that comes and more actively countering your opponent because to attack you opens them up to being shut down. Or so historical re-enactors have told me. I've done a bit of epee fencing where the shield is used to deflect (at the last minute you knock the point away) and lock in combination with the blade. If you take a hit too centrally, you can jar your hand, damage the shield part of the weapon and be disarmed.
That's ONLY true insofar as the benefit gained. But claiming it's a feat (which it isn't) has other ramifications, namely any mechanic that effects feats.
Which in other words is zero mechanics (aside from your rules-lawyer misreading of the fighter bonus feat swapping ability) so this is just pointless pedantry and nobody cares.
|
But if proficiency in something doesn't count as the feat, then you have to take that feat in order to have as a prerequisite. In other words, under RD's interpretation, a fighter that wants to take Shield Focus must first take Shield Proficiency(the feat), even though he already has shield proficiency(the class feature).
The free proficiencies are bonus feats. They even specifically say so. (At least the Armor and Shield proficiency feats do.)
Shield Proficiency (Combat)
You are trained in how to properly use a shield.
Benefit: When you use a shield (except a tower shield), the shield's armor check penalty only applies to Strength- and Dexterity-based skills.
Normal: When you are using a shield with which you are not proficient, you take the shield's armor check penalty on attack rolls and on all skill checks that involve moving.
Special: Barbarians, bards, clerics, druids, fighters, paladins, and rangers all automatically have Shield Proficiency as a bonus feat. They need not select it.
Special: Fighters and paladins automatically have Heavy Armor Proficiency as a bonus feat. They need not select it.
Special: All characters except monks, sorcerers, and wizards automatically have Light Armor Proficiency as a bonus feat. They need not select it.
Special: Barbarians, clerics, druids, fighters, paladins, and rangers automatically have Medium Armor Proficiency as a bonus feat. They need not select it.
How am I misreading it, Roberta?
In any case, that doesn't really matter for the purposes of this discussion. Even if there isn't one now, it is entirely possible that a new mechanic could be made later on that deals with feats in some fashion.
Also, anyone using v3.5 psionics can switch feats out with certain powers. That makes this a BIG deal in such games.
Actually, I prefer to play--and I'm one of the only players in our group who ever uses shields.
In real historical combat, people weren't always smashing their blades against one another or beating against shields. Your sword might break, or might get lodged in the wood of your opponent's shield. Outside of a sunder attempt, you're trying to avoid hitting the shield hard, perhaps knocking it aside to create an opening.
Here's a houserule I toyed with for a while:
Automatic Sunder Rule:
Shield bonus is added last. Armor bonus is added second-to last. Track all three ACs (Full AC, Shield AC, and Armor AC). Any time an attacker misses the full AC but hits the shield or armor, allow an automatic Sunder attempt that never provokes an AoO. For purposes of this free Sunder attempt, treat the armor or shield as if its hardness is 50% higher (this little add-on makes it so this houserule doesn't invalidate the Sunder maneuver).
Example:
Fred is wearing Chainmail, a Heavy Shield, has +2 from DEX, +1 from a Ring of Protection and +1 from Dodge. Fred's AC is: Full: 22, Shield: 20, Armor 14. Any time his attacker rolls a 20 or 21 the shield is hit. Any time the attacker rolls anything between 14 and 19 the armor is hit.
I thought this rule would add some verisimilitude by making armor and shields not be indestructible, but all it did was ruin the AC of the non-mages and require lots of return trips to town or Mend spells or extra gear to be carried - extra bookkeeping to aggravate the players for no real benefit.
That's ONLY true insofar as the benefit gained. But claiming it's a feat (which it isn't) has other ramifications, namely any mechanic that effects feats.Proficiency or feat, it is still the same thing.THEY. ARE. NOT. FEATS.
They are free proficiencies.
Either way, using a shield properly is a learned skill that require training and practice - THAT's the point here. You learn to use a shield to deflect incoming attacks; you also have the shield as a form of cover against attacks - your attacker doesn't want to hit the shield, after all, he wants to hit YOU.
I don't recall ever refuting that point.
|
All the people talking about all the special training that goes into using a shield are ignoring the benefit that the feat Shield Proficiency actually gives: all the feat does is remove some penalties from using a shield.
A wizard can use a shield and get the same AC benefit out of it as a fighter. Any commoner can slap on a tower shield for +4 to their AC. In fact, I've seen several oracle builds that involve using a tower shield despite non-proficiency.
Special materials like darkwood and mithral make it even more ridiculous. If you want to use a heavy shield, and you never want to have to train with it, just get it made out of darkwood or mithral, and suddenly you might as well be trained with it! Sure you can't take Improved Shield Bash or Shield Focus, but if all you wanted was an extra 2-7 AC, you are fine.
I can't relax, I have to deflect with this tiny shield!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I demand strict adherence to real-world physics in my game about elf wizards fighting demiliches.
I demand strict adherence to real-world physics in my game about elf wizards fighting demiliches.
Which demands that most dragons immediately become crushed by their own weight. The question is: Do I get the XP for this?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've been playing a halfling axe and board fighter for two levels now, but the more he sees combat, the more verisimilitude weakens for me. I just can't seem to rationalize away the durability of his "heavy" wooden shield, which is every bit as effective as its medium counterpart, but only weighs one half the amount.
How is it that it is not shattered every time it is pitted against the metal weapons of medium creatures?
I know the game is abstract and simplified, but being able to rationalize certain things makes the game more fun for me.
Please help me come up with something that makes sense and rationalizes this problem away.
Valium and Gin.
I imagined a proportional change for all dimensions. This actually does make sense. Especially since halflings are, pound for pound, stronger than larger folk.The thickness of the shield is the same, the weight reduction comes from the lessened area. In fact, given the same thickness, the greater surface area of a shield larger in diameter should make it more flimsy than a more compact design.
If it were a proportional change in all dimensions, it would weigh one-eighth as much, since it would be half as wide, half as thick and half as long. (2x2x2) -- the fact that it's only half weight means the shield is only reduced to half size in one dimension (probably height), or is something more akin to 70% as tall, 70% as wide and then just as thick).