|
I have been digging for *weeks*, and I cannot find the official ruling. What is "penalty" when attacking with the shield? Do I just ignore TWF, or do I ignore other things? Without an official ruling, I cannot use two shields with this feat in PFS.
My recommendation would be to FAQ those threads you've been reading through and continue their discussions.
|
I've always thought they only meant the 2WF penalty on the attack you made with your shield. And that seems to be what Jason's saying as well.
Though you could stretch the wording to apply it to any other penalty as well of course. But that falls into the category of "too good to be true, so that's probably not how it's supposed to be read".
The penalty negation is for the shield only. Many time the rules have to read in context. Otherwise you can ignore all penalties no matter where they can from, even if they come from spells, or enemy class features.
I heard somebody else say that was the RAI of the feat, but RAW is pretty clear that you add your shield enhancement bonus to attack rolls. That's almost literally what it actually says, with almost no room for contention.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It says "Add your shield’s enhancement bonus to attack and damage rolls made with the shield as if it were a weapon enhancement bonus."
It doesn't say add your shield’s shield bonus to attack and damage rolls made with the shield as if it were a weapon enhancement bonus.
If it were intended to be a +2 for a heavy shield, then it should bloody well say shield bonus instead of enhancement bonus.
I'd understand if shield based combat were already in a good state, but currently Shield Master is the only thing that makes using a shield a worthwhile choice. The feat taxes and requirements are already sky high.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, it should, or the FAQ should be retracted, because it's not a clarification, it's a straight-up change of the rule. I'm wagering it was an internal disagreement on the part of the dev team.
Well, it never actually made it into an official FAQ or errata, so I think it kind of died in committee. I mean, that comment is from 2010...
|
|
Well, it never actually made it into an official FAQ or errata, so I think it kind of died in committee. I mean, that comment is from 2010...No. If you enter into your time machine and read the shield master feat pre-errata it read:
"Benefit: You do not suffer any penalties on attacks rolls made with a shield while you are wielding another weapon. Add your shield's shield bonus to attacks and damage rolls made with the shield as if it was an enhancement bonus."
That is what the rule was when that particular JB post was made.
After the 2nd printing it was errata'd as follows:
Page 133—In the Shield Master feat, change the last sentence of the Benefit paragraph to read as follows: Add your shield’s enhancement bonus to attack and damage rolls made with the shield as if it was a weapon enhancement bonus.
Now, its not exactly the change the JB implied with his post but they did errata it.
So basically they errataed it to do the opposite of what JB wrote? Weird. But the current text makes much more sense.
It's quite powerful, but then you need to commit quite heavily to shields to actually get the feat.
I'm jumping in to also point out that link isn't faq.
The feat literally said all penalties on your attack roll don't exist, but go slayer with two levels brawler, and enjoy your brawlers flurry with no twf penalties since that is the way most people find to be an acceptable interpretation.
That link is not an FAQ, but a board post so while it is not official it can show intent. With that aside a few things such as the interaction of invis with stealth were supposed to be touched upon, but fell by the wayside, at least for now.
Jason being the lead dev is who I go to until errata comes out since it often ends up being official anyway.
Except in this case an errata did come out after the post that contradicted the post. Since the errata is the more recent and raw source, that post should not be binding.
What errata is this?
|
|
Except in this case an errata did come out after the post that contradicted the post. Since the errata is the more recent and raw source, that post should not be binding.What errata is this?
The second to third printing errata document, seen here:
Page 133—In the Shield Master feat, change the last
sentence of the Benefit paragraph to read as follows:
Add your shield’s enhancement bonus to attack and
damage rolls made with the shield as if it was a weapon
enhancement bonus.
At the time of JB's forum post, the text read "Benefit: You do not suffer any penalties on attacks rolls made with a shield while you are wielding another weapon. Add your shield's shield bonus to attacks and damage rolls made with the shield as if it was an enhancement bonus."
I thought you were saying a change was made regarding the penalties.
The intent is pretty clear, but he still should have errata'd the entire feat instead of just part of it.
I don't think many GM's will allow you to ignore every penalty from every other source, but the cleaner language would still be nice.
Note that while the feat description says, "You do not suffer any penalties on attack rolls made with a shield while you are wielding another weapon." the one-line table summary of the feat on page 116 says, "No two-weapon penalties when attacking with a shield", which can probably be taken as a clue to the intent of the 'no penalties' clause.
(The Shield Proficiency summary says, "No penalties on attack rolls when using a shield" so treating the summaries as RAW isn't too helpful either. The unofficial FAQ linked earlier is probably a better guide.)
So how does this work with the Bashing property of magical shields? Is the +1 enhancement bonus given from the Bashing ability added to the +1 defensive bonus of the shield when the wielder has the Shield Master feat?
For instance, would a relatively simple Magical +1 Light 'Bashing' Shield grant a ranger with the Shield Master feat a total of +2 to attack and damage with the shield (since it IS inherently a +2 shield)? Or do the feat and the magical property basically overlap and grant only the +1 to attack and damage? I suppose in the latter case, the Bashing property still grants a larger damage dice, but a character with the Shield Master feat misses out on half the magical property of a Bashing shield.
Oh, and a follow up question. In the hands of a ranger with Shield Master, would the Defiant property act effectively as Bane?
Armor and shields with this special ability excel at blocking the attacks of certain types of creatures, similar to a bane weapon’s excelling against certain foes. Against the designated foe, the item’s enhancement bonus to AC is +2 better than its actual bonus and provides DR 2/— against attacks from that foe. This increase in enhancement bonus applies only to the armor or shield’s enhancement bonus, not to temporary bonuses (such as the magic vestment spell). To randomly determine the armor or shield’s designated foe, use the table for the bane weapon special ability (page 136).
Seems like getting the Defiant property grants an extra bonus to those with Shield Master, but I wasn't sure if there was an errata or FAQ on this. Thanks for your help!
Enhancement bonuses don't stack, so you would only have +1 to hit and damage.
Enhancement bonuses don't stack, so you would only have +1 to hit and damage.
Thanks Dragonhunter! I finally found another thread that does address my question and agrees with your statement. I had also seen that TWF issue addressed, and it makes sense to me. Do you know about that Defiant issue I raised when I edited my post a moment ago?
I mean, it wouldn't be as good as Bane (no 2d6 boost to damage), but it seems like if you had a Defiant shield vs Giants, then you'd get the +2 to AC against them (in addition to DR 2/-) and then when bashing them, gain an additional +2 above the regular enhancement bonus.
of course, you could still have a +5 (shield) +1 shocking holy bane (weapon) enhanced shield.
Right, but my understanding of this is that the +5 enhancement ONLY goes to your AC (so presuming no other feat bonuses or the like except for Improved Shield Bash, your light shield now grants +6 protection even when you make an attack).
As to attacking with the shield, again since enhancement bonuses don't stack, your attack/damage would be (BAB+STR+5 to attack [+7 vs bane foes]) and (STR+5+1d6shock to damage against all creatures, +2d6 vs evil, and an additional +2d6 vs bane foes)
And since TWF bonuses don't apply to shield, you make attacks without the -2 penalty, nor is your STR damage halved.
Does all that sound about right?
Though I'm still curious if Defiant grants that +2 bonus to AC and attack/damage rolls in the hand of a Shield Master character.
Though I'm still curious if Defiant grants that +2 bonus to AC and attack/damage rolls in the hand of a Shield Master character.
Defiant increases the shields enhancement bonus to AC and Shield Master allows you to apply the shield's enhancement bonus to AC to attack and damage.