Exactly.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
But that is patently wrong.
In all games, the word "like" is used to inherit traits from another object. In this case inheriting the disadvantages of the Heavy Shield.
If the ring is not supposed to be treated as a heavy shield, then why mention a heavy shield? It would have been easier to simply state this ring provides a +2 shield bonus.
Absolutely the best point to make on this subject.
But it would seem that it negates every single mechanical disadvantage of a shield, except for monks.
That makes RAI suspect in my book.
And as shown the other day, the Dan Bong gives you a +2 to grapple, but doesn't take away the -4 for not having both hands free. I don't think that was the intent there either.
|
This is another "Shield" Monk AC question...
Does a Monk/Wizard or Monk/Sorcerer that cast 1st level spell "Shield" (which provides a Shield bonus) loss the Wisdom AC bonus?
Shield 1st level Arcane Abjuration (force) Spell...
"Shield creates an invisible shield of force that hovers in front of you. It negates magic missile attacks directed at you. The disk also provides a +4 shield bonus to AC. This bonus applies against incorporeal touch attacks, since it is a force effect. The shield has no armor check penalty or arcane spell failure chance."
Monk: AC Bonus
"When unarmored and unencumbered, the monk adds his Wisdom bonus (if any) to his AC and his CMD. In addition, a monk gains a +1 bonus to AC and CMD at 4th level. This bonus increases by 1 for every four monk levels thereafter, up to a maximum of +5 at 20th level.
These bonuses to AC apply even against touch attacks or when the monk is flat-footed. He loses these bonuses when he is immobilized or helpless, when he wears any armor, when he carries a shield, or when he carries a medium or heavy load."
The text states "when he(or she) carries a shield" . Thus Magical Force effects aren't carried.
|
|
Related point does an Enlightened Paladin/Wizard, Enlightened Paladin/Sorcerer using same "Shield" lose his/her Confident Defense when using the spell "Shield"?
Confident Defense(Ex)
At 1st level, when wearing light or no armor and not using a shield, an Enlightened paladin adds 1 point of his Charisma bonus (if any) per class level to his Dexterity bonus to his Armor Class. If he is caught flat-footed or otherwise denied his Dexterity bonus, he also loses this bonus.
This ability replaces his proficiency with medium armor, heavy armor, and shields.
Does a Monk/Wizard or Monk/Sorcerer that cast 1st level spell "Shield" (which provides a Shield bonus) loss the Wisdom AC bonus?
They keep their Wis bonus to AC. Carrying a shield and getting a shield bonus to AC are two different things.
Cases like the ring are more ambiguous, but this doesn't affect a spell like Shield.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well I did see a lich in another thread... but actually he might of been a lychee.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well I did see a lich in another thread... but actually he might of been a lychee.
You don't know me! GAH!
*flounces upstairs; listens to The Smiths; sketches bats on tombstones*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does a Monk/Wizard or Monk/Sorcerer that cast 1st level spell "Shield" (which provides a Shield bonus) loss the Wisdom AC bonus?They keep their Wis bonus to AC. Carrying a shield and getting a shield bonus to AC are two different things.
Cases like the ring are more ambiguous, but this doesn't affect a spell like Shield.
I'm kinda laughing at the carrying part. So if I throw a throwing shield at a monk with snatch arrows then does he lose his bonus for carrying a shield now?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Enlightened PaladinEnlightened Paladin isn't a Paizo class.
I assume they're talking about the archetype from Inner Sea Combat.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I assume they're talking about the archetype from Inner Sea Combat.
There is no Paizo archetype named Enlightened Paladin. There is a renamed one on d20pfsrd, but people don't know that unless they know that. So unless the OP wishes to create confusion, they should use the proper names.
Personally, I would just take the Unhindering Shield feat.
It will allow so much more than just a +2 bonus to my monk's AC.
There are many things in PF that are "used as" or "treated as" or "wielded as" a different thing. In general, these phrases mean that the thing in question uses all the rules of the thing it's treated as.
In the case of a ring of Force Shield, the ring is "wielded as" a heavy shield. This means it uses all the same rules as a heavy shield with the exceptions noted in the ring's description:
It can be used to shield bash
It can be modified by feats like Shield Focus and Weapon Focus
A non-proficient character takes a -0 penalty
When in use, it is used like a heavy shield with an ACP and ASF of 0.
There are many things in PF that are "used as" or "treated as" or "wielded as" a different thing. In general, these phrases mean that the thing in question uses all the rules of the thing it's treated as.
Not true.
At any time the "treated as" statement works to the character's advantage, the arguments stating that "treated as" =/= "is" result in threads far longer than this one.
Monk and shield seems a mutually exclusive concept!!
Not true.
At any time the "treated as" statement works to the character's advantage, the arguments stating that "treated as" =/= "is" result in threads far longer than this one.
Yeah I have to agree here if this was about getting a bonus if the item was a shield instead of a penalty you would see numerous post about them not being the same thing.
There are many things in PF that are "used as" or "treated as" or "wielded as" a different thing. In general, these phrases mean that the thing in question uses all the rules of the thing it's treated as.Not true.
At any time the "treated as" statement works to the character's advantage, the arguments stating that "treated as" =/= "is" result in threads far longer than this one.
Sometimes, yes, but I often see players who want to use "treated as" for purposes other than intended.
For example, a ring of Force Shield is only wielded as a heavy shield when it's actually being used. The rest of the time it's not a heavy shield, so it can't be enchanted as a shield, for instance.
There are many things in PF that are "used as" or "treated as" or "wielded as" a different thing. In general, these phrases mean that the thing in question uses all the rules of the thing it's treated as.Not true.
At any time the "treated as" statement works to the character's advantage, the arguments stating that "treated as" =/= "is" result in threads far longer than this one.
Sometimes, yes, but I often see players who want to use "treated as" for purposes other than intended.
For example, a ring of Force Shield is only wielded as a heavy shield when it's actually being used. The rest of the time it's not a heavy shield, so it can't be enchanted as a shield, for instance.
And it is also only treated as a heavy shield for monks. Everything else that makes it a heavy shield is not a heavy shield. It has no weight. No ACP. Does not require proficiency. Yet somehow, it screws up a Monk's AC bonus.
And it is also only treated as a heavy shield for monks. Everything else that makes it a heavy shield is not a heavy shield. It has no weight. No ACP. Does not require proficiency. Yet somehow, it screws up a Monk's AC bonus.There are many things in PF that are "used as" or "treated as" or "wielded as" a different thing. In general, these phrases mean that the thing in question uses all the rules of the thing it's treated as.Not true.
At any time the "treated as" statement works to the character's advantage, the arguments stating that "treated as" =/= "is" result in threads far longer than this one.
Sometimes, yes, but I often see players who want to use "treated as" for purposes other than intended.
For example, a ring of Force Shield is only wielded as a heavy shield when it's actually being used. The rest of the time it's not a heavy shield, so it can't be enchanted as a shield, for instance.
Of course it would affect the Monk. Why wouldn't it?
This ring generates a shield-sized (and shield-shaped) wall of force that stays with the ring and can be wielded by the wearer as if it were a heavy shield (+2 AC). This special creation has no armor check penalty or arcane spell failure chance since it is weightless and encumbrance-free. It can be activated and deactivated at will as a free action.
When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses his AC bonus, as well as his fast movement and flurry of blows abilities.
It's the same way for a Ecclesitheurge Cleric.
At 1st level, an ecclesitheurge makes a vow to his deity to be protected solely by his faith, not by armor or shields. An ecclesitheurge who wears armor or uses a shield is unable to use his blessing of the faithful ability, use cleric domain powers, or cast cleric spells.
It's wielded as a Heavy Sheild. It's plainly telling you that to get the Sheild bonus you have to use it as a Shield.
If the ring is not supposed to be treated as a heavy shield, then why mention a heavy shield? It would have been easier to simply state this ring provides a +2 shield bonus.
Legacy wording. It was worded this way in 3.5 and they did not change it.
Tangentially related question:
If a monk dips into kineticist and picks up the water elemental defense talent, does he lose his monk abilities by using said defense talent to bolster his AC?
Monk and shield seems a mutually exclusive concept!!
It's really not. All you need is the feat investment for a monk to use a shield while retaining his AC bonuses.
Tangentially related question:
If a monk dips into kineticist and picks up the water elemental defense talent, does he lose his monk abilities by using said defense talent to bolster his AC?
No. Having a shield bonus and wielding a shield are two different things. At no point (that I saw, at least) in the talent does it indicate that it is considered to be holding a shield.
Tangentially related question:
If a monk dips into kineticist and picks up the water elemental defense talent, does he lose his monk abilities by using said defense talent to bolster his AC?
As a shield, most likely not. The character does not equip or wield the shield, it floats around him.
As armor, debatable. If you state is actually is armor, as opposed to simply functioning as armor, the first question I ask is, is it light, medium, or heavy armor. All worn armor is one of the three and some monk archetypes can flurry while wearing some types, but not others.
8.500 gp for a +2 AC shield bonus with no penalties? A fair trade imo.
And it is also only treated as a heavy shield for monks. Everything else that makes it a heavy shield is not a heavy shield. It has no weight. No ACP. Does not require proficiency. Yet somehow, it screws up a Monk's AC bonus.There are many things in PF that are "used as" or "treated as" or "wielded as" a different thing. In general, these phrases mean that the thing in question uses all the rules of the thing it's treated as.Not true.
At any time the "treated as" statement works to the character's advantage, the arguments stating that "treated as" =/= "is" result in threads far longer than this one.
Sometimes, yes, but I often see players who want to use "treated as" for purposes other than intended.
For example, a ring of Force Shield is only wielded as a heavy shield when it's actually being used. The rest of the time it's not a heavy shield, so it can't be enchanted as a shield, for instance.
Of course it would affect the Monk. Why wouldn't it?
This ring generates a shield-sized (and shield-shaped) wall of force that stays with the ring and can be wielded by the wearer as if it were a heavy shield (+2 AC). This special creation has no armor check penalty or arcane spell failure chance since it is weightless and encumbrance-free. It can be activated and deactivated at will as a free action.When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses his AC bonus, as well as his fast movement and flurry of blows abilities.It's the same way for a Ecclesitheurge Cleric.
At 1st level, an ecclesitheurge makes a vow to his deity to be protected solely by his faith, not by armor or shields. An ecclesitheurge who wears armor or uses a shield is unable to use his blessing of the faithful ability, use cleric domain...
Because while it is "wielded as one" it doesn't "weigh as one", or "armor check penalty as one", or "require proficiency as one". Those are a whole lot of things that happen when "wielding as one" that aren't happening. Is he using a shield or is he using a ring?
I don't know anything about that cleric. Not knowing the rest of the quote, I wonder if there is any effect since the cleric can turn off the shield as a free action. Does turning it off negate all of the penalties of "wielding" it? As in, are all of the lost effects only possible on the clerics turn? If so, we are back to only the monk being penalized because every other detriment of the shield can be ignored.
Because while it is "wielded as one" it doesn't "weigh as one", or "armor check penalty as one", or "require proficiency as one". Those are a whole lot of things that happen when "wielding as one" that aren't happening.
Actually, you've named them all (except the proficiency one, that not a thing). That's not a lot of things.
...And it is also only treated as a heavy shield for monks. Everything else that makes it a heavy shield is not a heavy shield. It has no weight. No ACP. Does not require proficiency. Yet somehow, it screws up a Monk's AC bonus.There are many things in PF that are "used as" or "treated as" or "wielded as" a different thing. In general, these phrases mean that the thing in question uses all the rules of the thing it's treated as.Not true.
At any time the "treated as" statement works to the character's advantage, the arguments stating that "treated as" =/= "is" result in threads far longer than this one.
Sometimes, yes, but I often see players who want to use "treated as" for purposes other than intended.
For example, a ring of Force Shield is only wielded as a heavy shield when it's actually being used. The rest of the time it's not a heavy shield, so it can't be enchanted as a shield, for instance.
Of course it would affect the Monk. Why wouldn't it?
This ring generates a shield-sized (and shield-shaped) wall of force that stays with the ring and can be wielded by the wearer as if it were a heavy shield (+2 AC). This special creation has no armor check penalty or arcane spell failure chance since it is weightless and encumbrance-free. It can be activated and deactivated at will as a free action.When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses his AC bonus, as well as his fast movement and flurry of blows abilities.It's the same way for a Ecclesitheurge Cleric.
At 1st level, an ecclesitheurge makes a vow to his deity to be protected solely by his faith, not by armor or shields. An ecclesitheurge who wears armor or uses a shield is unable to use his blessing of the
"wielded by the wearer as if it were a heavy shield" is all that matters.
It could go on to saw the shield has no acp, doesn't require proficiency, is made of cheese, doesn't like being in the dark, and is afraid of bears.
Nothing after the wielded part even matters to the Monk or abilities like it.
If you use a shield you don't get the Monk stuff. The Ring says you can wield it as a heavy shield. End of discussion.
...And it is also only treated as a heavy shield for monks. Everything else that makes it a heavy shield is not a heavy shield. It has no weight. No ACP. Does not require proficiency. Yet somehow, it screws up a Monk's AC bonus.There are many things in PF that are "used as" or "treated as" or "wielded as" a different thing. In general, these phrases mean that the thing in question uses all the rules of the thing it's treated as.Not true.
At any time the "treated as" statement works to the character's advantage, the arguments stating that "treated as" =/= "is" result in threads far longer than this one.
Sometimes, yes, but I often see players who want to use "treated as" for purposes other than intended.
For example, a ring of Force Shield is only wielded as a heavy shield when it's actually being used. The rest of the time it's not a heavy shield, so it can't be enchanted as a shield, for instance.
Of course it would affect the Monk. Why wouldn't it?
This ring generates a shield-sized (and shield-shaped) wall of force that stays with the ring and can be wielded by the wearer as if it were a heavy shield (+2 AC). This special creation has no armor check penalty or arcane spell failure chance since it is weightless and encumbrance-free. It can be activated and deactivated at will as a free action.When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses his AC bonus, as well as his fast movement and flurry of blows abilities.It's the same way for a Ecclesitheurge Cleric.
At 1st level, an ecclesitheurge makes a vow to his deity to be protected solely by his faith, not by armor or shields. An ecclesitheurge who wears armor or uses a shield is unable to use
So, it has the hardness and hit points of a shield?
So, it has the hardness and hit points of a shield?
Why does it's hardness or hit points matter? That doesn't change anything. It still "can be wielded by the wearer as if it were a heavy shield".
The only part that matters to a Monk or similar abilities like it is that the shield the ring creates is "wielded by the wearer as if it were a heavy shield". You literally wield it as a heavy shield to use it.
But as a side note it won't have the hardness and hit points of a shield from the "Table: Common Armor, Weapon, and Shield Hardness and Hit Points" since it's not made of wood or steel.
The Ring of Force Shield generates a shield sized/shaped wall of force. Which can be wielded as if it were a heavy shield.
So it's hardness and hit points would be determined via the spell wall of force.
So based on how a wall of force works. The shield would have Hardness 30 and 180 hit points, since the ring is caster level 9th.
Wait, what? You would rather spend 3 feats and wait till 9th level to use a buckler?Personally, I would just take the Unhindering Shield feat.
It will allow so much more than just a +2 bonus to my monk's AC.
For the eventual +7 AC and additional properties like Righteous?
Yes, I would. A shield is one of the cheapest ways to increase AC and there are quite a few nice properties the monk has difficulty accessing by other means.
Though for a monk I would be tempted to dip one level into fighter. If done on an odd numbered level, you can pick up all three feats in one shot.
"wielded by the wearer as if it were a heavy shield" is all that matters.
It could go on to saw the shield has no acp, doesn't require proficiency, is made of cheese, doesn't like being in the dark, and is afraid of bears.
Nothing after the wielded part even matters to the Monk or abilities like it.
If you use a shield you don't get the Monk stuff. The Ring says you can wield it as a heavy shield. End of discussion.
So, any character using a Force Shield can benefit from feats and abilities that require the character to be wielding a shield, for example:
- Saving Shield
- Shield Focus
- Ray Shield
- Equipment tricks
- Sacrificial Shield
Might be easier to make a Brawler at that point.
Personal preference, there are several classes normally bared from using shield that have Unhindering Shield builds available for people who want a little extra defense/offense.
|
Any reason for the necro?
For a monk, using a Ring of Force Shield or any shield is counterproductive.
When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses his AC bonus, as well as his fast movement and flurry of blows abilities.
The Ring is wielded as a heavy shield. That is the same as using a heavy shield, so the monk would lose his AC bonus.
My view is this: you can shield bash with it. Therefore you are wielding it. No Monk goodies for you.