There's nothing in the archetype that says what kind of weapon you have to use; shields are legitimate weapons.
Also note that shields with the Bashing enchantment act as +1 weapons. Not as good as Shield Master, but extra damage with the shield on top of not having to enchant the shield as a weapon is pretty decent.
Two-Weapon Fighting is a requirement for the Shield Slam feat so, yes, it is perfectly legitimate. A Ranger can also choose Two-Weapon Fighting as part of his feat progression when he selects the Weapon and Shield style.
Yup, using a shield as a weapon is covered by Two-Weapon Fighting.
bonuses is the plural form of bonus.... back to reading
About the familiar-yes, that is a common use for the eldritch heritage feat.
An interesting fact about familiars- they always have half your hp and all of your BAB, skills, and saves. This means that they could theoretically be useful combatants. Unfortunately, they do not ever technically 'level up', so they cannot get any new feats. Sure, some might be able to make ranged touch attacks if you armed them with alchemical weapons, but it seems a waste.
You might want to look into improved familiar at level 9 (give or take). A few of the options have more combat ability than the tiny animals on the standard list. The earth elemental (available at level 5 for most, level 7 for you). It has decent strength, power attack, a single natural attack (1.5x STR and power attack damage, although limited to standard attacks), and even improved bull rush (which gives it something to do with its your full BAB and its STR). The earthglide ability is also useful.
Of course, all this is assuming I am not entirely off base on how eldritch heritage interacts with improved familiar. I tried looking it up, but did not find anything too conclusive.
Just trying to help.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, I suppose without any context it seems strange. I noted the (what appeared to be English) mistake, posted a comment and then went on to read the rest of the question. I found that the other posters had answered your question quite admirably and moved on.
Keep in mind Tower shields cannot be used as weapons (shield bash etc).
Heavy shields count as 1-hand weapons.
Light Shields count as light 1-hand weapons.
Therefore, putting a heavy shield in your off-hand lowers your attack bonus significantly.
I have come across this problem with my Celtic-style Barbarian/Druid concept. The sword-and-board style with aggressive use of the shield is definitely in keeping with the Celtic warrior stereotype, but shield attacks don't really come into their own until quite late on (when you can take Shield Master and Shield Slam).
A heavy shield is going to be great for AC, of course, and is therefore always worthwhile for a warrior. Any attacks made with it however (until Shield Master), give a -4/-4 to attacking, all for a 1d4 (x2 crit). It hardly seems worthwhile!
So, whilst I would love to be bashing with the shield at lower levels to keep the verisimilitude of the concept, it probably isn't going to happen in any meaningful encounter.
This is a shame, because the average Classical/Dark Age/Early Medieval warrior was taught the shield bash as part of his basic combat technique, and this can't be modelled in Pathfinder without several feats and BAB levels. Game balance, I guess, but a 1d4/x2 attack is not exactly earth-shattering!
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Keep in mind Tower shields cannot be used as weapons (shield bash etc).
Heavy shields count as 1-hand weapons.
Light Shields count as light 1-hand weapons.
Therefore, putting a heavy shield in your off-hand lowers your attack bonus significantly.
They don't "count as" weapons.
They are weapons.
Shields are weapons.
This is a shame, because the average Classical/Dark Age/Early Medieval warrior was taught the shield bash as part of his basic combat technique, ....
First: Dont compare PF and realism :)
Second: Maybe it was a combat technique in some cultures but then the shield was not for killing the enemy. The killing blow was done with a 'real' weapon like swords and spears. The shield was for hurting and pushing back, breaking the line or stance etc.In PF a shield is at first a protective item AND then a weak weapon. With feats and enchantments it is a protective item AND a moderate weapon. Sounds fair for the rest of the game ..
Shields are definitely weapons. Roman Legionaries would charge you and bash you with their shield to throw you off balance and create an opening and then reach in with their gladius and stab you before crouching behind their big shield again.
I built a double heavy shield wielding fighter with shield master. My GM was not amused. All the bull rushs + heavy bashing shield spike lead blade enlarged fighter made for hilarity.
This is a shame, because the average Classical/Dark Age/Early Medieval warrior was taught the shield bash as part of his basic combat technique, ....First: Dont compare PF and realism :)
Second: Maybe it was a combat technique in some cultures but then the shield was not for killing the enemy. The killing blow was done with a 'real' weapon like swords and spears. The shield was for hurting and pushing back, breaking the line or stance etc.In PF a shield is at first a protective item AND then a weak weapon. With feats and enchantments it is a protective item AND a moderate weapon. Sounds fair for the rest of the game ..
The point is not that the shield doesn't rip enemies apart, but that it doesn't do what it should - knock them off balance or create space for the follow-up attack.
You get there eventually, but it does limit your build concepts. A shame, because if a game can't model real life to a rough degree (not vice versa, by the way) then something might be wrong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
bonuses is the plural form of bonus.... back to readingi used the latin plural.
Seeing how it's originally a latin word used across different languages with differing declinations, that should not be a reason to call me out on that.
[derailment]In fairness, "bonus" isn't really a Latin word. Pluralization in English is odd. Sometimes the rules of the language of origin are used (hence, media) because they are familiar, even if doing so seems overly formal or academic (see: foci). The purely English rule though is that once words are adopted, English rules of pluralization apply, meaning "mediums", "focuses", and "bonuses" are all correct.
Same with "octopus" for that matter. Should be, and is, "octopusses", though if we're being true to language of origin, it'd be "octopodes" (not "octopi" - that's only accepted due to usage based on widespread misunderstanding).[/derailment]
You swap out a longsword for a inferior main weapon? Not really my cup of tea. To say nothing of you then having the shield as a primary weapon rather than as a shield. It also stinks of cheese.
I think I'll wait for Shield Master.
|
|
Just wait until someone points out that you can cleave and great cleave with a shield, and if you have shield slam, get bullrushes on all of them.
Especially if you are a dwarf with goblin cleaver and orc hewer, so you don't care where they are spaced.
What happens then?
Is there something I am missing?
I´d probably go for a spiked bashing light shield for the lower penalties when my character TWFs, but yes, TGMaxMaxer´s build seems quite fun.
Hmm, I am not sure one can use a heavy shield two-handed for higher str-to-damage ratio. It should not work, but by the rules it just might.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Technically Shield Bash says it's an off-hand attack, and only counts as one-handed for the purposes of TWF penalties. I'd probably let a player MH one, but he wouldn't be able to wear the shield and THF it.
Absolutely wrong.
See here.
Also, it doesn't just "count as" an one-handed weapon, the Heavy Shield is an one-handed weapon. A Light Shield is a light weapon.
You can wield a Heavy Shield with two hands, to add x1.5 strength to damage.
You swap out a longsword for a inferior main weapon? Not really my cup of tea. To say nothing of you then having the shield as a primary weapon rather than as a shield. It also stinks of cheese.
I think I'll wait for Shield Master.
Long to Short sword isn't that much a difference. And Shields can be spiked.
Just for reference... I wasn't two handing the shield in those examples.
Str +5 Brawler +3 Bashing +1 Power attack +4 Gloves of Dueling (with the FAQ for similar weapon training replacements) +2.
He's played up a lot, and will be level 7 after the next game.
Has 30k gold already.
Could ya link to this FAQ? Love to see it for my brawler.
You swap out a longsword for a inferior main weapon? Not really my cup of tea. To say nothing of you then having the shield as a primary weapon rather than as a shield. It also stinks of cheese.
I think I'll wait for Shield Master.
The whole video is interesting, but pay attention to 13:15 and 17:10
I don't think it's so cheesy. Well, unless vikings are cheesy too. Which might very well be true :)
Again, this word "cheese" used to brand suboptimal but interesting character actions and builds. Shields are weapons. The rest follows.
Have fun when you get to where you can afford a +1 adamantine throwing returning heavy shield. It'll be glorious.
Not to derail the derail, but if Mordred sticks with the 2 weapon fighter archetype, using a heavy shield would be swinging at a -2/-2 at level 11 since the archetype gets "Improved Balance" at that point.
At 11th level, the attack penalties for fighting with two weapons are reduced by –1 for a two-weapon warrior. Alternatively, he may use a one-handed weapon in his off-hand, treating it as if it were a light weapon with the normal light weapon penalties.
This ability replaces Armor Training 3.
Not to derail the derail, but if Mordred sticks with the 2 weapon fighter archetype, using a heavy shield would be swinging at a -2/-2 at level 11 since the archetype gets "Improved Balance" at that point.
** spoiler omitted **
Or -1/-1 if he fights with heavy shield and short sword.