TWF w / Weapon and Armor Spikes while wielding a Shield


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 494 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

13 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

As far as I can tell from reading the rules, I should be able to do TWF with a weapon as my primary attack, armor spikes as my secondary attack, and a shield in my other hand. I will still get the Shield's AC bonus when using a Full-Round action for TWFing.

I tried to find a discussion of this topic in the boards already, but the only one that I found addressing this specific idea was 4 years old and devolved into a "can you use Armor Spikes for TWF with a 2H weapon" which was off-topic and not something I'm interested in discussing here.

Specifically I have a PFS Fighter with the TWF feat that uses a Longsword and Armor Spikes, but also has a Quickdraw Throwing Spiked Light Shield for +1 AC. However, I also have a PFS CORE Barbarian that will be using a Longsword with a Heavy Shield. I was going to go the Shield Bash route, but I might prefer to use Armor Spikes instead of a Spiked Heavy Shield until I am able to get Shield Mastery at lvl 11 or so.

I'm looking for a ruling that would be relevant to PFS.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So long as you're not making an attack with your shield or shield arm and only use two "hands" worth of attacks then you are fine.

So yes, you can wear a shield and get the shield bonus and attack with your longsword and armor spikes.

For what it's worth, armor spikes do not count as being wielded in a hand, but take up a "hands" worth of effort to attack with.

Tl;dr: You should be fine.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:

So long as you're not making an attack with your shield or shield arm and only use two "hands" worth of attacks then you are fine.

So yes, you can wear a shield and get the shield bonus and attack with your longsword and armor spikes.

For what it's worth, armor spikes do not count as being wielded in a hand, but take up a "hands" worth of effort to attack with.

Tl;dr: You should be fine.

I would disagree with that, based on this FAQ:

Armor Spikes: Can I use two-weapon fighting to make an "off-hand" attack with my armor spikes in the same round I use a two-handed weapon? wrote:


No.
Likewise, you couldn't use an armored gauntlet to do so, as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks.

You can use the same logic to read that as "you are using both of your hands to wield your shield and weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks."

Think of is as having two hands worth of stuff you can do. Wielding a shield takes a hand, making an attack with a main hand weapon takes a hand, making an attack with an off hand weapon takes a hand (and armor spikes are treated as an off hand weapon if you're using a main hand weapon), making an attack with a two handed weapon takes both hands. (Some things add an action you can take, such as the helmet that grants a gore attack or the iron beard that explicitly grants an extra attack.)

So, shield, main hand, armor spikes: Pick two.

For PFS, at best expect table variation. There will certainly be some people who won't allow you to TWF and get the shield bonus, while others might well allow it.

I'm not sure that Improved Shield Bash would work, either. The way it's written says flat out no, since you're not making a shield bash. But the spirit might be "yes." Again, table variation, and I'd personally be much more likely to allow it in a home game than a PFS game.

If you only plan on playing this character in your local PFS group, talk to your coordinator/GMs for a ruling. If you're planning on going to cons, traveling, or have a really large PFS presence in your area expect to not be able to do your schtick at every table. For best results, explain what your character does before the game starts to get a ruling right off the bat instead of breaking the flow of the game on the first combat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Using a shield does not consume your off-hand, so long as you're not attacking with it. So that logic doesn't fly.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I know about the 2H weapon ruling. RAW it does not apply here. Although I see the logic you use I don't think it's clear that it's correct.

Making an off-hand attack does not make other off-hand items unavailable. Consider a character with armor spikes, a reach weapon, and a Gauntlet; or a character with armor spikes and two swords. Such a character could do TWF (excluding the reach weapon), or attack with any one weapon, but doing any of those things doesn't make other weapons unavailable for use with AoOs or extra attacks from Haste, etc. Ergo, making two attacks while wielding a shield does not make your shield unavailable for defense UNLESS you use the shield as one of those weapons.

Using a shield to make an attack (without Impr. Shield Bash) explicitly causes the +2 AC to go away, but I know of no other RAW that says you lose a shield bonus just because you used a full round attack to attack with two weapons (other than your shield).

--

I didn't mean to imply that Improved Shield Bash applies to Armor Spikes. It clearly doesn't, RAW or RAI.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Off-hand is only in existence when TWF and using weapons. The Off-Hand is a metaphorical hand of effort hand. Wielding a shield doesn't matter, because if you have an alchemist with three hands it can use a greatsword and shield, but still can't use a greatsword and armor spikes. Thus the shield doesn't affect the TWF or off-hand abilities.


a two-handed weapon takes your off-hand, this is in reference to your metaphysical hands of effort. this allows you to use your off-hand since he is using a longsword and not taking his off-hand. RAI and RAW both allow for armor spikes, a longsword while wielding a shield.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

You could be fine or could not be depending on rules interpretations and FAQ interpretations.

The fine point comes down to whether or not using your offhand also is considered (in the written, unwritten, or FAQ) as using your offhand to wield a shield.

So expect table variance, as this exact scenario is explicitly not covered by any clear rule or FAQ.


James Risner wrote:

You could be fine or could not be depending on rules interpretations and FAQ interpretations.

The fine point comes down to whether or not using your offhand also is considered (in the written, unwritten, or FAQ) as using your offhand to wield a shield.

So expect table variance, as this exact scenario is explicitly not covered by any clear rule or FAQ.

alchemist's hands allow for shield wielding, i posit this as proof that shields do not require an off-hand.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Bandw2 wrote:
alchemist's hands allow for shield wielding, i posit this as proof that shields do not require an off-hand.

A link would be interesting to me, but I'm sure that wouldn't be enough to convince all parties involved. So I'd still say table variance is inevitable. Complicated rules interactions like this often have table variance issues. If you are building characters without firm "this rule calls out my scenario as working this way" should always accept and understand table variance.


caps wrote:

As far as I can tell from reading the rules, I should be able to do TWF with a weapon as my primary attack, armor spikes as my secondary attack, and a shield in my other hand. I will still get the Shield's AC bonus when using a Full-Round action for TWFing.

I tried to find a discussion of this topic in the boards already, but the only one that I found addressing this specific idea was 4 years old and devolved into a "can you use Armor Spikes for TWF with a 2H weapon" which was off-topic and not something I'm interested in discussing here.

Specifically I have a PFS Fighter with the TWF feat that uses a Longsword and Armor Spikes, but also has a Quickdraw Throwing Spiked Light Shield for +1 AC. However, I also have a PFS CORE Barbarian that will be using a Longsword with a Heavy Shield. I was going to go the Shield Bash route, but I might prefer to use Armor Spikes instead of a Spiked Heavy Shield until I am able to get Shield Mastery at lvl 11 or so.

I'm looking for a ruling that would be relevant to PFS.

I've posted an idea about a Quickdraw, Throwing Shield combined with a Blinkback Belt. It's cool, but if you do anything with that shield hand, you can't then use your shield for defense even if you do recover your shield on your belt instantly and then re-draw it as a Free Action unless you have some other special ability analagous to how Improved Shield Bash lets you use your shield for defense even after you Bashed with it.

A Scizore gives you a +1 Shield Bonus to AC, but not on rounds you attack with it. You can hold a weapon in the same hand you have a Buckler in, but if you attack with that weapon, you don't get to use the Buckler's AC bonus that round. The only way around that I can think of is if you make Attacks of Opportunity with those weapons, since AoO's happen outside the normal round.

Grand Lodge

kestral287 wrote:
Using a shield does not consume your off-hand, so long as you're not attacking with it. So that logic doesn't fly.

Using a shield to gain a defensive bonus does consume your off hand however.

The "alchemist with 3 arms can two weapon fight and wield a shield" is ambiguous, as the Alchemist discovery says your extra hand does not let you make more attacks than usual, and if you are wielding a shield you could usually only make one hand worth of attacks...

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bandw2 wrote:
James Risner wrote:

You could be fine or could not be depending on rules interpretations and FAQ interpretations.

The fine point comes down to whether or not using your offhand also is considered (in the written, unwritten, or FAQ) as using your offhand to wield a shield.

So expect table variance, as this exact scenario is explicitly not covered by any clear rule or FAQ.

alchemist's hands allow for shield wielding, i posit this as proof that shields do not require an off-hand.

No.

It's a specific exception to the rule.

The default rule is, if you attack with the second hand, you lose the SHield AC.
The first exception is Improved Shield Bash. If you bash with the shield as an attack, you keep the Shield AC.
Second (not) Exception: The Alchemist's Vestigial arm and variants. No, you don't gain the benefits of a shield while TWF. The exception is not called out. You can use it to hold a shield without having to draw one, but in all ways you have the same number of attacks and are subject to the same limits as the general rule. If you attack with two weapons, you lose the shield's AC, because it does NOT specifically say you get to keep it, and goes out of its way to say 'nothing changes with attacks.'

So, attacking with armor spikes, lose the Shield AC. Without an exception, it falls under the general rules, also.

==Aelryinth


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Where does it say in the general rules that you lose the shield bonus? Can you give me a quote from the CRB?

The shield bash rules say "If you use your shield as a weapon, you lose its AC bonus until your next turn." They don't say anything about other attacks. The section on two-weapon fighting says nothing about Shield to AC either. Armor Spikes section says nothing about any kind of AC.


Aelryinth wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
James Risner wrote:

You could be fine or could not be depending on rules interpretations and FAQ interpretations.

The fine point comes down to whether or not using your offhand also is considered (in the written, unwritten, or FAQ) as using your offhand to wield a shield.

So expect table variance, as this exact scenario is explicitly not covered by any clear rule or FAQ.

alchemist's hands allow for shield wielding, i posit this as proof that shields do not require an off-hand.

No.

It's a specific exception to the rule.

The default rule is, if you attack with the second hand, you lose the SHield AC.
The first exception is Improved Shield Bash. If you bash with the shield as an attack, you keep the Shield AC.
Second (not) Exception: The Alchemist's Vestigial arm and variants. No, you don't gain the benefits of a shield while TWF. The exception is not called out. You can use it to hold a shield without having to draw one, but in all ways you have the same number of attacks and are subject to the same limits as the general rule. If you attack with two weapons, you lose the shield's AC, because it does NOT specifically say you get to keep it, and goes out of its way to say 'nothing changes with attacks.'

So, attacking with armor spikes, lose the Shield AC. Without an exception, it falls under the general rules, also.

==Aelryinth

except you haven't shield bashed, so it's okay. you're using your off-hand to pelvic thrust with your armor spikes basically for all I care. you don't lose shield AC.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Your shield is an off-hand weapon and defense.

If you use it as a weapon, you lose the shield bonus. If you defend with it, you aren't attacking with that hand.

If you are using a third hand, or a weapon NOT in the shield hand, you are now using your off-hand to 'not wield a shield'. You don't get the benefits of both, sorry - 'off hand' encompasses more then that.

Simply holding a shield does not give you AC. It must be occupying a hand and being used AS A SHIELD. As shield bash points out, you can be holding onto a shield and not gain any AC from it.

So, what you are saying is simple - I am attacking with armor spikes as my off-hand, my off-hand is no longer being used to defend with a shield.

And you lose the AC bonus.

The Shield Bash language is there to confirm that even if you are still 'wielding' a shield, there is a difference between wielding it as a weapon and wielding it as a shield.

If you are using another off-hand, you aren't getting the benefits of the shield, either.

==Aelryinth


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think you are projecting what makes sense to you onto the text. The shield text simply does not mention anything about off-hands at all. Unless you're referring to a section of the CRB I'm not finding?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Can you please show me where it has been established anywhere that using a shield (for defense) requires any hands worth of effort? To my knowledge the only time the hands of effort has been discussed is with regard to making attacks.

If there is evidence that a shield requires hands of effort to gain the benefit of the defense, then you would not keep the AC bonus from the shield (though you would continue to have it on).

Unless that can be established, and it has not been previously established within my knowledge, then you can do as I said before.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

Your shield is an off-hand weapon and defense.

If you use it as a weapon, you lose the shield bonus. If you defend with it, you aren't attacking with that hand.

If you are using a third hand, or a weapon NOT in the shield hand, you are now using your off-hand to 'not wield a shield'. You don't get the benefits of both, sorry - 'off hand' encompasses more then that.

Simply holding a shield does not give you AC. It must be occupying a hand and being used AS A SHIELD. As shield bash points out, you can be holding onto a shield and not gain any AC from it.

So, what you are saying is simple - I am attacking with armor spikes as my off-hand, my off-hand is no longer being used to defend with a shield.

And you lose the AC bonus.

The Shield Bash language is there to confirm that even if you are still 'wielding' a shield, there is a difference between wielding it as a weapon and wielding it as a shield.

If you are using another off-hand, you aren't getting the benefits of the shield, either.

==Aelryinth

there is no "off-hand" for wielding a shield. It takes an actual hand, but 0 metaphysical hands.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

What you are attempting to do is called 'three-hand fighting'.

Paizo already ruled it does not work.

A shield occupies a 'hand'.

If you are using that 'hand' for any purpose other then wielding the shield, you don't get the benefit of the shield.

It's the same rule that says you can't kick with UA or bodyslam with Armor Spikes while using a 2 handed weapon...your 'hands' are full. You don't get three hands to play with (or 4, if you want to use armor spikes AND kick with UA and really cheese the rules, "It doesn't say I can't do it!" munchkinism).

Vestigial Arm specifically states you don't get extra attacks from it. You can sub iteratives, and you can hold onto stuff.

'Hold onto' is different from 'wield'. That was clarified, also. Wield means 'actively use'.

Go look up the FAQ on TWF with Greatswords and Armor spikes. 3 handed fighting is not allowed. And what you are trying to do is 3 handed fighting...I want my cake and to eat it, too. "I want to attack with two weapons, and get my shield AC, and I don't want to spend feats on it."

Nope. without specific exceptions (i.e. Imp shield bash) it doesn't work that way.

Also, you do know that you lose the use of a buckler (shield AC) if you attack with a weapon in that arm, right? Which is basically exactly what you are looking for for justification?

When the shield hand is used for something other then shielding, you lose the AC. Doesn't matter if its buckler and dagger, or armor spikes instead of a large shield.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Chess Pwn wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Your shield is an off-hand weapon and defense.

If you use it as a weapon, you lose the shield bonus. If you defend with it, you aren't attacking with that hand.

If you are using a third hand, or a weapon NOT in the shield hand, you are now using your off-hand to 'not wield a shield'. You don't get the benefits of both, sorry - 'off hand' encompasses more then that.

Simply holding a shield does not give you AC. It must be occupying a hand and being used AS A SHIELD. As shield bash points out, you can be holding onto a shield and not gain any AC from it.

So, what you are saying is simple - I am attacking with armor spikes as my off-hand, my off-hand is no longer being used to defend with a shield.

And you lose the AC bonus.

The Shield Bash language is there to confirm that even if you are still 'wielding' a shield, there is a difference between wielding it as a weapon and wielding it as a shield.

If you are using another off-hand, you aren't getting the benefits of the shield, either.

==Aelryinth

there is no "off-hand" for wielding a shield. It takes an actual hand, but 0 metaphysical hands.

Incorrect. Go look at the buckler. i'll wait.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:

Can you please show me where it has been established anywhere that using a shield (for defense) requires any hands worth of effort? To my knowledge the only time the hands of effort has been discussed is with regard to making attacks.

If there is evidence that a shield requires hands of effort to gain the benefit of the defense, then you would not keep the AC bonus from the shield (though you would continue to have it on).

Unless that can be established, and it has not been previously established within my knowledge, then you can do as I said before.

See the buckler.

yOu can wear a buckler as an archer.
You can wear one while TWF.
You can wear one 2h fighting.
If you fight, you lose the benefit of the shield bonus until that hand is doing nothing but wielding the buckler.
You must make the choice between buckler AC and using that hand.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Your shield is an off-hand weapon and defense.

If you use it as a weapon, you lose the shield bonus. If you defend with it, you aren't attacking with that hand.

If you are using a third hand, or a weapon NOT in the shield hand, you are now using your off-hand to 'not wield a shield'. You don't get the benefits of both, sorry - 'off hand' encompasses more then that.

Simply holding a shield does not give you AC. It must be occupying a hand and being used AS A SHIELD. As shield bash points out, you can be holding onto a shield and not gain any AC from it.

So, what you are saying is simple - I am attacking with armor spikes as my off-hand, my off-hand is no longer being used to defend with a shield.

And you lose the AC bonus.

The Shield Bash language is there to confirm that even if you are still 'wielding' a shield, there is a difference between wielding it as a weapon and wielding it as a shield.

If you are using another off-hand, you aren't getting the benefits of the shield, either.

==Aelryinth

there is no "off-hand" for wielding a shield. It takes an actual hand, but 0 metaphysical hands.

Incorrect. Go look at the buckler. i'll wait.

==Aelryinth

buckler wrote:
Benefit: You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's Armor Class bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler's Armor Class bonus until your next turn. You can't make a shield bash with a buckler.

IF it did set something it would show that normally there's nothing and the buckler is unique requiring an exception to the normal rule of not having a penalty.

Grand Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

No attack with shield?

No loss of shield bonus.

That is the be all, end all answer.

You want to attack with two unarmed strikes, or a Longsword and Armor Spikes, or whatever other two weapons you are able to attack with, then you maintain your shield bonus.

Full stop.


Aelryinth wrote:

Your shield is an off-hand weapon and defense.

gonna have to stop you right there, because it's a shield, not an "off-hand weapon", and you only lose it's AC when you shield bash.

you're starting your argument and basing it largely on a false premise.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Just checking if BBT has shown up to Scream hands or debate the unwritten rules on this yet........Nope I'll be back.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The buckler says "You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off-hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a -1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so... In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn."

So this tells us that A) a buckler does not consume an "off-hand" slot (else using an off-hand weapon and a buckler would be impossible) and B) using the arm with the buckler in it makes you lose the buckler's AC bonus.

I'm now seeing a little more of your RAI argument, but I don't think it's completely persuasive, nor RAW (none of this stuff is mentioned in the shield section).


Aelryinth wrote:
Claxon wrote:

Can you please show me where it has been established anywhere that using a shield (for defense) requires any hands worth of effort? To my knowledge the only time the hands of effort has been discussed is with regard to making attacks.

If there is evidence that a shield requires hands of effort to gain the benefit of the defense, then you would not keep the AC bonus from the shield (though you would continue to have it on).

Unless that can be established, and it has not been previously established within my knowledge, then you can do as I said before.

See the buckler.

yOu can wear a buckler as an archer.
You can wear one while TWF.
You can wear one 2h fighting.
If you fight, you lose the benefit of the shield bonus until that hand is doing nothing but wielding the buckler.
You must make the choice between buckler AC and using that hand.

==Aelryinth

specific (the buckler) overwrites general.

Grand Lodge

Talonhawke wrote:
Just checking if BBT has shown up to Scream hands or debate the unwritten rules on this yet........Nope I'll be back.

Umm... He is two posts above you.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Talonhawke wrote:
Just checking if BBT has shown up to Scream hands or debate the unwritten rules on this yet........Nope I'll be back.

Currently needless to bring up. I would hardly say I scream, and know I am not the only one.

By the way, although obviously joking, this does border on a personal attack.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
I would hardly say I scream, and know I am not the only one.

Nope, not the only one. :)


I am playing a Shield Champion brawler. I flurry with my Unarmed Strikes all the time and keep my shield bonus. I have not had a single complaint nor ever considered that I would lose the shield bonus.

Grand Lodge

Komoda, they have ruled that you can flurry with one hand. It no longer takes both hands. So flurry away. But it is not really relevant to this discussion.


graystone wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
I would hardly say I scream, and know I am not the only one.
Nope, not the only one. :)

Nope, not even close to the only one.


Yeah...I'm not buying that the buckler sets a precedent for other shields that it somehow uses up a hand of effort or causes you to lose the AC bonus if you use it for something else.

Those are specific buckler rules. Rules that allow you wield a weapon in that hand, not requiring a 3rd physical hand.

For what it's worth, you could use a buckler to do what the OP wants instead of a heavy or light shield. He would also have the choice to wield his longsword in two hands, loose the AC bonus and not be able to TWF since hes using a two handed weapon. Which may be useful when he has to move and can't use a full round action to TWF. With a light or heavy shield he can't wield his sword in both hands.


FLite, The argument isn't about actual hands. It is about using the metaphysical hand. Flurry, even if it only uses one hand/weapon, uses all the metaphysical hands available. You can't even use natural attacks. And, as a brawler's flurry, you are using Two-Weapon fighting.

Grand Lodge

Komodo, so you are saying flurry requires all available hands.

Then you would agree that you cannot flurry while grappled, since grappled prevents you from using one of your hands? Or would you agree that since you can flurry with as many or as few hands as you want, you can flurry and not use the hand that is occupied wielding a shield?

A brawler *may* two weapon fight when flurrying, but they need not do so. and you cannot two weapon fight and wield a shield, so clearly you are not doing that.

brawlers flurry wrote:
When doing so, a brawler has the Two-Weapon Fighting feat

You *have* the feat, you are not automatically using it.


FLite wrote:

Komodo, so you are saying flurry requires all available hands.

Then you would agree that you cannot flurry while grappled, since grappled prevents you from using one of your hands? Or would you agree that since you can flurry with as many or as few hands as you want, you can flurry and not use the hand that is occupied wielding a shield?

A brawler *may* two weapon fight when flurrying, but they need not do so. and you cannot two weapon fight and wield a shield, so clearly you are not doing that.

brawlers flurry wrote:
When doing so, a brawler has the Two-Weapon Fighting feat

You *have* the feat, you are not automatically using it.

not sure i get your point. physical hands are not tied to the TWFing terms of primary and off-hand.


FLite wrote:
and you cannot two weapon fight and wield a shield, so clearly you are not doing that.

I missed where someone showed any proof that wielding a shield takes a hand of effort. Does wielding a boulder helmet or Scizore? Cause it sounds like you could use up all your hands of effort before you actually make any attacks the way you're thinking.

To be clear, all three items give benefits for equipping the items vs attacking with them. One shield bonus, one a +2 circumstance bonus to the wearer's AC against critical hit confirmation rolls and one +1 shield bonus and NONE have made an attack.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

caps wrote:

The buckler says "You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off-hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a -1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so... In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn."

So this tells us that A) a buckler does not consume an "off-hand" slot (else using an off-hand weapon and a buckler would be impossible) and B) using the arm with the buckler in it makes you lose the buckler's AC bonus.

I'm now seeing a little more of your RAI argument, but I don't think it's completely persuasive, nor RAW (none of this stuff is mentioned in the shield section).

You are reading it exactly wrong.

If you are using the buckler for defense, it's using the 'hand' slot and you are just holding onto your weapon. You get the AC bonus.

If you are using a weapon, the buckler is not using the 'hand' slot, and you do not get the AC bonus.

That's the STANDARD rules, you are choosing which object your 'hand' applies to. It straight out tells you to make a choice!

The 'exception' here is not "Only when using a buckler do you lose the AC when attacking with a weapon.' Come ON. The buckler is the LIGHTEST kind of a shield. If your rule DID work, the buckler would be the shield that it worked with, because it's the only shield that tells you you get an attack penalty for wearing it while attacking!

The 'exception' for the buckler is that you can hold a weapon in your hand and use it without having to put away the buckler. No other shield allows you to do that. You can't hold a short sword in your hand with a light or heavy shield, for example. It specifically says you don't get to keep the AC, but you don't have to Bash, either!

The FAQ is very, very firm on handedness. If you aren't devoting a hand to Shield AC, you don't get the benefit of the shield.

And yes, that means if you are doing a full TWF flurry AND getting shield AC, you are doing it completely wrong. You are three hand fighting. You are having your cake and eating it, too.

If you want the ability to attack with both hands and not lose Shield AC, take Improved Shield Bash. It takes an ENTIRE FEAT to circumvent the handedness rules, for a very good reason. Getting a free +7 to AC for nothing is NOT what RAW, FAQ or RAI are meant to do.

One of the cheesiest feats in 3.5E was Improved Buckler Defense, which allowed you to get the AC of a Buckler while using a 2H weapon, effectively giving you all the benefits fo sword and board with all the power of 2h fighting with ONE FEAT.

It doesn't work that way in PF.

==Aelryinth


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Oh, there's a FAQ reference on handedness? That sounds like exactly what I'm looking for! Please refer me to it!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
caps wrote:
Oh, there's a FAQ reference on handedness? That sounds like exactly what I'm looking for! Please refer me to it!

Yes, I too am interested on these "STANDARD rules" that Aelryinth knows of that explain that shields take a hand of effort, considering those rules are unwritten and only apply to a TWF FAQ.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:
caps wrote:

The buckler says "You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off-hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a -1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so... In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn."

So this tells us that A) a buckler does not consume an "off-hand" slot (else using an off-hand weapon and a buckler would be impossible) and B) using the arm with the buckler in it makes you lose the buckler's AC bonus.

I'm now seeing a little more of your RAI argument, but I don't think it's completely persuasive, nor RAW (none of this stuff is mentioned in the shield section).

You are reading it exactly wrong.

If you are using the buckler for defense, it's using the 'hand' slot and you are just holding onto your weapon. You get the AC bonus.

If you are using a weapon, the buckler is not using the 'hand' slot, and you do not get the AC bonus.

That's the STANDARD rules, you are choosing which object your 'hand' applies to. It straight out tells you to make a choice!

The RAW does not talk about hand slots, nor about shield's consuming them. It just says what happens to your Shield AC when making a shield bash, and what happens to your Shield AC and Attack Bonus when you use your buckler hand to make an off-hand attack or 2H a weapon.

Aelryinth wrote:
The FAQ is very, very firm on handedness. If you aren't devoting a hand to Shield AC, you don't get the benefit of the shield.

Actually, the FAQ is not clear on this at all. I searched it (the CRB FAQ, at least) and could not find anything on this topic (other than the already-dismissed-as-off-topic "armor spikes with 2h weapon" FAQ).


no the exception IS the specific item with it's description.


i'm guessing when one person has an opinion way different than the rest, he's probably made an assumption that is a given.

Grand Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Metaphorical Hands don't matter. Bucklers don't matter. "Hands of effort" don't matter.

Did you attack with the shield?

No?

THEN YOU MAINTAIN THE SHIELD BONUS TO AC!

That's it.

Done.

Absolute RAW, RAI, and super easy to understand.


A shield used defensively requires one physical hand.
A shield used defensively does not require a hand's worth of effort.

Hand's worth of effort only applies for attacks.

So yes, you can TWF with a one-handed sword and armor spikes, while continuing to gain a shield's AC bonus.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The rule is this. You have to use the shield hand to lose the shield AC. It does not say the "off-hand" makes you lose the shield bonus to AC.

Now if someone wants to argue otherwise create an FAQ because as the rules have been explained off-hands do not negate the shield bonus as a general rule.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Metaphorical Hands don't matter. Bucklers don't matter. "Hands of effort" don't matter.

Did you attack with the shield?

No?

THEN YOU MAINTAIN THE SHIELD BONUS TO AC!

That's it.

Done.

Absolute RAW, RAI, and super easy to understand.

Agreed. I came looking for a FAQ or some other rule I was unaware of. None has been offered and I assume if it existed it would have been offered by now.


wraithstrike is right.

...but not BBT because he is a meany who likes to yell by putting his text in caps and bolding it.

Aelryinth wrote:
Paizo already ruled it does not work.

Really? Where?

1 to 50 of 494 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / TWF w / Weapon and Armor Spikes while wielding a Shield All Messageboards