Can you two hand a heavy shield for 1.5 STR dmg?


Rules Questions

151 to 186 of 186 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
blackbloodtroll wrote:

For the whole "strapped to the arm, but not held in hand" thing, I advise you to reread the heavy steel shield description:

Ultimate Equipment wrote:
You strap a heavy steel shield to your forearm and grip it with your hand. A heavy steel shield is so heavy that you can’t use your shield hand for anything else. Whether wooden or steel, a heavy shield offers the same basic protection and attack benefits, though the two versions respond differently to some spells and effects (such as rusting grasp). A druid can use a heavy wooden shield, but not a heavy steel shield.

Not sure if this will help, but nowhere does it say that the hand gripping the shield must be the one on the end of the forearm it's strapped to.


I kind of hate debates. The rules here will be whatever Paizo decides they are, so if this is really a question which fires people's imaginations it seems like clicking the FAQ button would be more productive than arguing ad nauseum. It might help if the OP edited the first post to include the entire question instead of leaving part of it in the title of the thread although I'd expect Paizo's staff is more than clever enough to put the two parts together if needed.

For the record, I'd allow somebody to use a shield with two hands to get the 1.5 Str mod just like any other one-handed weapon I can think of besides the rapier. In fact, I'd just be happy that they weren't dual wielding shields while wearing a helmet shaped like a chicken head.

Sczarni

blackbloodtroll wrote:

A Shield is a weapon.

It is not damn improvised weapon.

It is not a "off-hand only" weapon.

It can be enchanted as a weapon, because it is a weapon.

It can be wielded in two hands, like any other weapon, because it is a weapon.

It is a valid choice for the Weapon Focus feat, and similar, because it is a weapon.

It is in the Close Fighter Weapon Group, because it is a weapon.

When pricing the shield for special materials, and no specific cost is listed for shields, you use the price for weapons, because it is a weapon.

No one bats a dang eye at the realistically unwieldable Dire Flail, Orc Double Axe, Barbazu Beard, or the Halfling Doulble Sling.

No, we flip over a weapon that has seen centuries of real combat, and pretend it's a nerf covered anchor, hand-cuffed to the arm.

To those, I, and Captain F*cking America say:

Stuff it.

I saw this thread and I clicked on it... Not because I have anything to add to this conversation (I don't).

I clicked on it because I knew you would click on this thread. And I knew you would post a reply. And I knew I would be missing out on something fantastic if I didn't see what that reply would be.

And I wasn't disappointed.

That's gold Jerry. Gold!

(And I agree with all of it.)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Does my Shaka Zulu warrior need to "strap on" his shield, and not touch it with his hand?

Does my Viking Warrior find himself incapable of bracing both arms behind his shield, to bash his enemies face?

Why is it that so many see it as some sort of foam shield, filled with rocks?

Is there too many LARPers, used to bulky padded heavy shields?


Devilkiller wrote:
In fact, I'd just be happy that they weren't dual wielding shields while wearing a helmet shaped like a chicken head.

I now know what my dual-shield slayer's Jingasa is going to be reflavoured to look like. :D

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Devilkiller wrote:
In fact, I'd just be happy that they weren't dual wielding shields while wearing a helmet shaped like a chicken head.

Oh, where is his chicken helmet?


This may be nitpicky on my part, but he seems to be jabbing with those shields rather than smashing. As such, they almost seem to be wielded more like Klar than proper shields.

A proper shield man bashes with the blunt side of the shields, and doesn't need any silly spikes or anything like that! :P


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Devilkiller wrote:
In fact, I'd just be happy that they weren't dual wielding shields while wearing a helmet shaped like a chicken head.
Oh, where is his chicken helmet?

on his head


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Does my Shaka Zulu warrior need to "strap on" his shield, and not touch it with his hand?

Does my Viking Warrior find himself incapable of bracing both arms behind his shield, to bash his enemies face?

Why is it that so many see it as some sort of foam shield, filled with rocks?

Is there too many LARPers, used to bulky padded heavy shields?

I wouldn't consider simply bracing your shield with your other arm to be wielding it with two hands. Can I get the 1.5x str bonus if I have my offhand holding the blade of my sword? What about if I have my offhand up near the head of the axe, while the mainhand is at the appropriate position?


Barathos wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Does my Shaka Zulu warrior need to "strap on" his shield, and not touch it with his hand?

Does my Viking Warrior find himself incapable of bracing both arms behind his shield, to bash his enemies face?

Why is it that so many see it as some sort of foam shield, filled with rocks?

Is there too many LARPers, used to bulky padded heavy shields?

I wouldn't consider simply bracing your shield with your other arm to be wielding it with two hands. Can I get the 1.5x str bonus if I have my offhand holding the blade of my sword? What about if I have my offhand up near the head of the axe, while the mainhand is at the appropriate position?

Sure. You're using two hands. And hands don't always have to be at the hilt.


Jesus, 160 posts on "this"... I hate threads like this, they make the guy who majors in english studies become the most powerful being in the universe!

Look, how many armies in the history of the world have ever used only a shield as a weapon? I'm guessing None? Maybe because the shield is a tool mostly designed for protection, and CAN be used for bashing, as can a frying pan, but that doesn't make them exactly the most deadly of weapons. Even in history, some shields have been adapted to have blades or spikes, but still, their main funciton would still be to protect and the adaptation would still not be as good as a dedicated weapon, or we would have seen armies using only spiked shields.

But, inside a fantasy RPG, it doesn't matter so much, in here we can have someone like Captain America that's as good with a shield as a anybody else is with any other weapon. So, just because in the real world shields don't have an extra handle, doesn't mean it should break the way we handle weapons rules in game.

Don't waste your time guys, make it simple. If it's a heavy shield, you can apply you STR x1.5 with it, and if it's a light shield you can't, and if the handling is bothering you so much just let the player buy a magic handle that "maginetically" attackes to any shield, cheap.


Kchaka wrote:

Jesus, 160 posts on "this"... I hate threads like this, they make the guy who majors in english studies become the most powerful being in the universe!

Look, how many armies in the history of the world have ever used only a shield as a weapon? I'm guessing None? Maybe because the shield is a tool mostly designed for protection, and CAN be used for bashing, as can a frying pan, but that doesn't make them exactly the most deadly of weapons. Even in history, some shields have been adapted to have blades or spikes, but still, their main funciton would still be to protect and the adaptation would still not be as good as a dedicated weapon, or we would have seen armies using only spiked shields.

But, inside a fantasy RPG, it doesn't matter so much, in here we can have someone like Captain America that's as good with a shield as a anybody else is with any other weapon. So, just because in the real world shields don't have an extra handle, doesn't mean it should break the way we handle weapons rules in game.

Don't waste your time guys, make it simple. If it's a heavy shield, you can apply you STR x1.5 with it, and if it's a light shield you can't, and if the handling is bothering you so much just let the player buy a magic handle that "maginetically" attached to any shield, cheap.

At least the English majors finally got something out of it :-P

There's no point in people fighting over it. They should just FAQ it and move on.

I like the idea of a magnetised shield, could provide an AC bonus against metal weapons by pulling it to the shield.


Kchaka wrote:

Jesus, 160 posts on "this"... I hate threads like this, they make the guy who majors in english studies become the most powerful being in the universe!

Then ignore it. However I would correctly point out that communication is the most essential element of any military.

Quote:


Look, how many armies in the history of the world have ever used only a shield as a weapon? I'm guessing None?

Well you guessed wrong.

Quote:
Maybe because the shield is a tool mostly designed for protection, and CAN be used for bashing, as can a frying pan, but that doesn't make them exactly the most deadly of weapons.

Well you wouldn't use it as a frying pan -- you would use it to kill your enemies, The shield is very much a weapon.

Quote:
Even in history, some shields have been adapted to have blades or spikes, but still, their main funciton would still be to protect and the adaptation would still not be as good as a dedicated weapon, or we would have seen armies using only spiked shields.

Spikes are not typical on shields because a shield is a better weapon without them and they interfere with deflection. The Targe is one of the rare spiked shields.

Quote:


But, inside a fantasy RPG, it doesn't matter so much, in here we can have someone like Captain America that's as good with a shield as a anybody else is with any other weapon. So, just because in the real world shields don't have an extra handle, doesn't mean it should break the way we handle weapons rules in game.

Quite frankly the idea the shield needs to be strapped to the arm is nuts and not fitting with reality. An extra handle isn't even needed and simply shows a lack of understanding in the many uses of a shield.

Quote:
Don't waste your time guys, make it simple. If it's a heavy shield, you can apply you STR x1.5 with it, and if it's a light shield you can't, and if the handling is bothering you so much just let the player buy a magic handle that "maginetically" attackes to any shield, cheap.

Included for sake of fully quoting.


Quote:


Look, how many armies in the history of the world have ever used only a shield as a weapon? I'm guessing None?
Quote:


Well you guessed wrong.

Which military force was equipped solely with a shield?


Barathos wrote:
Quote:


Look, how many armies in the history of the world have ever used only a shield as a weapon? I'm guessing None?
Quote:


Well you guessed wrong.
Which military force was equipped solely with a shield?

I read the statement wrong. However the shield has been used as a weapon by most militaries that used shields.


Just a Guess wrote:
Barathos wrote:
Quote:


Look, how many armies in the history of the world have ever used only a shield as a weapon? I'm guessing None?
Quote:


Well you guessed wrong.
Which military force was equipped solely with a shield?
The infamous goalpost mover.

No not this case -- that was his initial statement.


Just a Guess wrote:
Barathos wrote:
Quote:


Look, how many armies in the history of the world have ever used only a shield as a weapon? I'm guessing None?
Quote:


Well you guessed wrong.
Which military force was equipped solely with a shield?
The infamous goalpost mover.

How dare I expect someone to back up their claims, right?

Which goalpost would that be? I couldn't care less if someone wants to two-hand a shield, but I expect people to back up their claims and not be hypercritical.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Barathos wrote:
Quote:


Look, how many armies in the history of the world have ever used only a shield as a weapon? I'm guessing None?
Quote:


Well you guessed wrong.
Which military force was equipped solely with a shield?

The same one equipped with clerics, fireball tossing wizards, dragonback riding knights, kungfu monks and heavily armored dwarves.


illyume, I can’t take credit for the Red Rooster double shield outfit Jet Li wore in Last Hero in China starting at around 1:32:18. I would definitely encourage you to make a PC modeled after it though.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Barathos wrote:
Quote:


Look, how many armies in the history of the world have ever used only a shield as a weapon? I'm guessing None?
Quote:


Well you guessed wrong.
Which military force was equipped solely with a shield?
The same one equipped with clerics, fireball tossing wizards, dragonback riding knights, kungfu monks and heavily armored dwarves.

> Person A says something didn't happen in history.

> Person B says it did.
> Person C asks for a source.
> Person D says a fantasy game is a historical source.

I never said that there couldn't be armies like that in a fantasy game, we're talking about historical militaries. I'm not saying that it didn't happen in RL it shouldn't happen in a fantasy game, I'm just after a source on whether that actually happened.


so historicly speaking no force ever was equiped soly with a shield for armiment, most weapons were far more efective in a fight.

that said getting 2 arms of force behind a shield is super easy, one hand is wearing the shield, second free hand grips the forarm strapped to the shield, both arms then are used to forcimy bash in someones face. the langspear faq isnt relivent because the shield is not a reach weapon, people were asking if they could use the butt of the spear as an improvised weapon so they could attack in neibouring squares.

in real combat a force wielding only shields (or 2 shields cuz why leave one hand empty) would probly loose, they simply arnt as good as swords and the like, in one on one combat though shields greatly improve their chances. shields are already marked as sub par weapons by their lower damage dice, you dont need to nerf them in other ways


Devilkiller, that video was awesome!

Definitely going to get that bird-shaped jingasa of the fortunate soldier. :D

Though, considering my shield-man slayer's already Andoran and has named himself Aegis Eagle (in true Metal Gear Solid fashion), I think I'll have to go with a different sort of bird.


While browsing I found something interesting:

Quote:
In chapter 32 of Bjarnar saga Hítdælakappa, Björn drove his shield into his opponent's head to kill him. Using the high shield position described earlier on this page, it's easy to imagine delivering a lethal one-handed punch with the edge of the shield. However, the saga suggests that Björn used two hands.

It's not about wielding a shield with no weapon but about two-handing a shield.


I'm glad I was able to spread a little kung-fu happiness. I'll also suggest that the Shield Slam feat is a lot of fun and having two shields and the Shield Master feat would probably only make it even more fun (though my Viking PC can't run around with two shields since it wouldn't fit the RP angle properly and he really likes throwing his hammer anyhow)

Back on topic, as Just a Guess's quote shows, historical and legendary accounts of shields being used as weapons exist. I also think Lagertha on the Vikings TV show has two-handed her shield a few times, and I distinctly Tyrion on HBO's Game of Thrones grabbing a shield with both hands and killing a guy with it.

I'm not sure why it should be difficult to imagine gripping the shield along the edge or by the handle. There's no requirement that other one-handed weapons have special "long handles" to allow their use with two hands to get the 1.5 Str mod. Anyhow, as previously stated by myself and others, clicking FAQ might be the best way to resolve these recurring threads on the subject once and for all.


Is there any army that has used only a single weapon?


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Is there any army that has used only a single weapon?

Even N. Korea has sticks and stones...


Shield Slam was my level 2 pick:
Slayer Talent: Ranger Combat Style Feat: (Sword and) Shield: Shield Slam

Complicated path to get there, but yeah. Lots of fun!


Wow, so much replies, yet so few FAQ click. It's no use to continue arguing here, only the dev' can give us a final answer. And you know how to get those answer guys: FAQ clicks!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

FAQ to say the Heavy Shield is an One-handed Weapon?

Yeah, that is going to happen.

Unless, there are unwritten rules that go against all the rules for weapons, that are explicit to this weapon, and work in spite of RAW, it might happen.

Does that need to happen?


It's caused enough debate enough times it's probably worth putting up a note, just to stop more heated arguments from sprouting up.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Well, the OP post is too obscure for a proper FAQ.


I agree that the OP's post wasn't well constructed and advised that it should be fixed. On the other hand, there's really no lack of clarity in the question at hand. If the community were sufficiently agitated about that question I think it would be good customer service for Paizo to answer it even if they had to step slightly outside the formal conventions of their FAQ policy to clarify the OP's post with a question like:

"Can you wield a heavy shield with two hands to gain 1.5 times your Strength modifier as a bonus to damage rolls?"

Honestly, the number of FAQ clicks so far probably wouldn't warrant much response though. I'm not sure if folks aren't clicking FAQ because they think the OP's post is a mess, because they don't care about the answer, or just because they think the answer is obvious. Regarding things that seem obvious, a lot of people probably wouldn't have guessed the official answer to whether you get 1.5 times your Str mod while using a lance in one hand while mounted. Paizo settled that debate with a FAQ, and I've actually seen rulings at several tables change in the wake of it.


Shall we start a new thread with a properly-asked question so it can be marked for FAQ, in that case?


If you write it up I'll click the FAQ button.


In Viking culture women who fought alongside men were called Shield Maidens. Guess what their primary weapon was? Their shields didn't strap to the arm either.

I already posted two examples of how modern police and military forces still use shields two handed. These techniques aren't new.

Anyone who says shields aren't weapons, or that they can't be two handed, clearly has no clue how shields actually work. They are weapons. They can be used two handed. If you don't understand how, think about it for a bit. It isn't complicated. Shields are incredibly intuitive.

The rules are also crystal clear. Heavy Shield = One Handed Weapon = eligible for two handed use.

If you are arguing semantics or historical references, you should probably stop. Those details are not on your side either.

Can we please put this topic to bed now?

151 to 186 of 186 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can you two hand a heavy shield for 1.5 STR dmg? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.