1- 1d8+6
2- 2d6+6 (spiked shield counting a 1 size larger than basic shield)
3- 3d6+6
4- ?
If including the gloves of duelling that would be 3d6+8 before strength, traits, enhancement bonus and feats for a bashing shield. And as it is a close weapon it can be used for brawler's flurry.
Archetype: If an archetype replaces a class ability with a more specific version of that ability (or one that works similarly to the replaced ability), does the archetype's ability count as the original ability for the purpose of rules that improve the original ability?
It depends on how the archetype's ability is worded. If the archetype ability says it works like the standard ability, it counts as that ability. If the archetype's ability requires you to make a specific choice for the standard ability, it counts as that ability. Otherwise, the archetype ability doesn't count as the standard ability. (It doesn't matter if the archetype's ability name is different than the standard class ability it is replacing; it is the description and game mechanics of the archetype ability that matter.)
Example: The dragoon (fighter) archetype (Ultimate Combat) has an ability called "spear training," which requires the dragoon to select "spears" as his weapon training group, and refers to his weapon training bonus (even though this bonus follows a slightly different progression than standard weapon training). Therefore, this ability counts as weapon training for abilities that improve weapon training, such as gloves of dueling (Advanced Player's Guide), which increase the wearer's weapon training bonus.
Example: The archer (fighter) archetype gets several abilities (such as "expert archer") which replace weapon training and do not otherwise refer to the weapon training ability. Therefore, this ability does not count as weapon training for abilities that improve weapon training (such as gloves of dueling). This is the case even for the "expert archer," ability which has a bonus that improves every 4 fighter levels, exactly like weapon training.
posted July 2013 | back to top
Close Combatant does not refer to weapon training like the dragoon or 2hander, so no go for the GoD..
According to your FAQ link, bashing and spiked do not stack with each other, since they're both effective size changes.
As Vorg said you don't apply two virtual size increases, and only apply the largest. Spiked shield only increases the size once but bashing increases twice. Your damage is 2d6+6.
Close Combat mastery allows you to use this shield's damage, or you damage, but the amount of damage is not modified by virtual size increases on the shield.
A bashing heavy shield does 1d8 damage.
A brawler 6 with a monks robe does 1d8 damage on close weapons.
You can choose to use the shield's damage of 1d8, or your close combat mastery of 1d8.
"The brawler can decide to use the weapon's base damage instead of her adjusted unarmed strike damage—this must be declared before the attack roll is made."
So then size increases from Spikes/Bashing change the base damage?
As Vorg said you don't apply two virtual size increases, and only apply the largest. Spiked shield only increases the size once but bashing increases twice. Your damage is 2d6+6.
If you look at the table for size increases 1d8 goes to 2d6 for one increase to 3d6 for the second. This in only counting bashing not bashing and spiked.
This is assuming that close weapon mastery and bashing stack. But as close weapon mastery is no size increase I do not see a reason why it should not.
Size increase FAQ:
If the size increases by one step, look up the original damage on the chart and increase the damage by two steps.
I assume that means 4 steps for two size increases of bashing
1d6
1d8Base damage because of close weapon mastery.
1d10
2d6First size increase
2d8
3d6Second size increase
3d8
italics are my comments and no quotes from the FAQ
Close Combat mastery allows you to use this shield's damage, or you damage, but the amount of damage is not modified by virtual size increases on the shield.
Why should that be the case? The close weapon mastery increases the base damage that should be modified by magic.
It replaces the shield's damage with the the level provided damage. The virtual size increases only apply to the shield damage, not to your unarmed strike damage.
As the unarmed strike damage -4 levels now IS the shield damage it should apply. Is this your interpretation or can you quote the rules on that?
I would always treat damage increases by things like close combat mastery and warpriest's sacred weapon as the new base damage.
If the "new base damage" doesn't apply when someone else uses the shield/weapon, then it's not base damage. Sacred Weapon and Close Weapon Mastery are class abilities that allows the player to use their own class ability progression on damage rather than the weapon's base damage. Which Sacred Weapon and Close Weapon Mastery even states as such:
Sacred Weapon wrote:
The warpriest can decide to use the weapon's base damage instead of the sacred weapon damage—this must be declared before the attack roll is made.
Close Weapon Mastery wrote:
The brawler can decide to use the weapon's base damage instead of her adjusted unarmed strike damage—this must be declared before the attack roll is made.
That only tells us that he can use the base damage if he wants to.
Close Weapon Mastery (Ex) wrote:
At 5th level, a brawler's damage with close weapons increases. When wielding a close weapon, she uses the unarmed strike damage of a brawler 4 levels lower instead of the base damage for that weapon (for example, a 5th-level Medium brawler wielding a punching dagger deals 1d6 points of damage instead of the weapon's normal 1d4). If the weapon normally deals more damage than this, its damage is unchanged. This ability does not affect any other aspect of the weapon. The brawler can decide to use the weapon's base damage instead of her adjusted unarmed strike damage—this must be declared before the attack roll is made.
the bashing shield is still a bashing shield and as such the damage is increased by 2 steps.
I know that people don't like shields doing much damage. The spiked/bashing discussion and following FAQ showed that. But even after rereading the rules several times I can't follow your interpretation.
edit: Would you say that a close weapon wielded by a brawler is immune to the hollow blades spell because only the base damage is reduced? It uses the same wording as lead blades which, according to your argumentation should not work.
That only tells us that he can use the base damage if he wants to.
Close Weapon Mastery (Ex) wrote:
At 5th level, a brawler's damage with close weapons increases. When wielding a close weapon, she uses the unarmed strike damage of a brawler 4 levels lower instead of the base damage for that weapon (for example, a 5th-level Medium brawler wielding a punching dagger deals 1d6 points of damage instead of the weapon's normal 1d4). If the weapon normally deals more damage than this, its damage is unchanged. This ability does not affect any other aspect of the weapon. The brawler can decide to use the weapon's base damage instead of her adjusted unarmed strike damage—this must be declared before the attack roll is made.
the bashing shield is still a bashing shield and as such the damage is increased by 2 steps.
I know that people don't like shields doing much damage. The spiked/bashing discussion and following FAQ showed that. But even after rereading the rules several times I can't follow your interpretation.
edit: Would you say that a close weapon wielded by a brawler is immune to the hollow blades spell because only the base damage is reduced? It uses the same wording as lead blades which, according to your argumentation should not work.
Bashing shield base damage would go up 2 steps, it just wouldn't stack with close weapon mastery; you're using one or the other, not both at the same time. It's use the brawler's unarmed damage table (with -4 levels) or the shield's new base damage that's been increased virtually by bashing.
For the hollow blades spell situation, the spell affects the target when using any of its melee weapons. Not the weapon itself being affected. A brawler's unarmed damage would be reduced in size by one step as the brawler is treated as one size smaller, so close weapon mastery would be reduced in size by one step also, and subsequent use of close weapon attacks (base damage or with close weapon mastery).
Lead Blades would work with close weapon mastery, as the brawler is treated as one size larger, so a level 8 brawler can shield bash for 2d6 as per lead blades. I'm not sure which applies) damage as the unarmed damage goes up (level 8 brawler does d10 unarmed damage, close weapons would be d8, size change would be 2d6), it just wouldn't change anything with bashing shield itself. (cuz that spell is a virtual size change for the weapon which wouldn't stack with bashing and you use the unarmed table -4 levels or the base damage of the weapon).
EDIT: Got confused by the brawler unarmed damage size table. Fixed up the damage.
So if changing the unarmed damage works (what you say it does) How about strong jaw on the brawler*?
Spoiler:
I would not say it works, but your argumentation seems to hint it does.
*The brawler's unarmed strike is considered a natural attack for benefitting from spells.
Apart from that: There was a FAQ on size increases that is linked upthread. 1D10 goes to 2D8. The brawler and monk table uses smaller steps of half size level increases.
Bashing and lead blades do not stack because they are the same kind of bonus. A virtual size increase.(See FAQ)
As they are the same bonus either both (not at the same time) can apply to a brawler's shield or none. And there is no indication in the rules that they do not apply. Not as written, that is. As it is a strong martial option RAI might well be no.
BTW: I got the bonus damage wrong. It's only +4, not +6. Thanks Cult of Vorg
According to your FAQ link, bashing and spiked do not stack with each other, since...
That's incorrect. The FAQ does not say that. The FAQ says virtual size increases do not stack. A spiked shield, per RAW, is a "weapon in its own right." That means you use the weapon table and weapon description to determine the damage of a spiked shield. As neither the weapon description nor the weapons table use any "as if" language, the spiked shield stacks with other virtual size increases. Nor does the spiked shield reference or refer to the shield spikes entry. Once you make a spiked shield with shield spikes and a heavy shield, the weapon damage is fixed, uses its own die (1d6) and is independent of the shield spikes language.
To put it another way, a spiked shield is no different than any other weapon in the weapon's table when determining what affects it. A spiked shield is not a shield affected by spikes, as some people seem to think.
According to your FAQ link, bashing and spiked do not stack with each other, since...
That's incorrect. The FAQ does not say that. The FAQ says virtual size increases do not stack. A spiked shield, per RAW, is a "weapon in its own right." That means you use the weapon table and weapon description to determine the damage of a spiked shield. As neither the weapon description nor the weapons table use any "as if" language, the spiked shield stacks with other virtual size increases.
No a spiked shield cannot be made or purchased without using the shield spikes entry on the armor table, which does have "as if" language. For better or worse, a spiked shield's damage is a virtual size increase.
According to your FAQ link, bashing and spiked do not stack with each other, since...
That's incorrect. The FAQ does not say that. The FAQ says virtual size increases do not stack. A spiked shield, per RAW, is a "weapon in its own right." That means you use the weapon table and weapon description to determine the damage of a spiked shield. As neither the weapon description nor the weapons table use any "as if" language, the spiked shield stacks with other virtual size increases.
No a spiked shield cannot be made or purchased without using the shield spikes entry on the armor table, which does have "as if" language. For better or worse, a spiked shield's damage is a virtual size increase.
No, that's false. The updated text in Ultimate Equipment literally states that the spiked shield is a "weapon in its own right." The older PRD definition does not use that language. The updated language specifically means that once you create the spiked shield, its damage is not a virtual size increase.
Your interpretation is a result of people failing to read and understand the Ultimate Equipment text entry for shield spikes. To put it simply, you don't attack with shield spikes, you attack with a spiked shield. The shield spikes text affirms this, in ALL versions.
According to your FAQ link, bashing and spiked do not stack with each other, since...
That's incorrect. The FAQ does not say that. The FAQ says virtual size increases do not stack. A spiked shield, per RAW, is a "weapon in its own right." That means you use the weapon table and weapon description to determine the damage of a spiked shield. As neither the weapon description nor the weapons table use any "as if" language, the spiked shield stacks with other virtual size increases.
No a spiked shield cannot be made or purchased without using the shield spikes entry on the armor table, which does have "as if" language. For better or worse, a spiked shield's damage is a virtual size increase.
\
No, that's false. The updated text in Ultimate Equipment literally states that the spiked shield is a "weapon in its own right." The older PRD definition does not us that language. The updated language specifically means that once you create the spiked shield, its damage is not a virtual size increase.
Using only the weapon table as it appears in Ultimate Combat, how much does a spiked shield weigh?
It's weight is special. In the description, it says to see armor spikes for details. This is the only way to get the complete stats for the spiked shield weapon, and therefore the rules that say shield spikes are virtual size increases apply.
Using only the weapon table as it appears in Ultimate Combat, how much does a spiked shield weigh?
It's weight is special. In the description, it says to see armor spikes for details. This is the only way to get the complete stats for the spiked shield weapon, and therefore the rules that say shield spikes are virtual size increases apply.
The weight is special because it depends on whether your use a wooden shield or a steel shield. That's also why the cost is simply a +x. But those stats are irrelevant for the FAQ because you know what doesn't say "special"? The damage.
Look, we've had this discussion before. But it's a fact that the UE text says the spiked shield is a "a weapon in its own right." Taking that text at face value and given the FAQ requires "as if" language, the spiked shield does not satisfy the requirement for inclusion. Now, if you attacked someone with shield spikes, then you'd be correct. But you can't attack with shield spikes. You first have to create a spiked shield. Once you do that, you have a bona fide weapon which no longer uses virtual size increase to determine damage. And you know what? There's nothing that contradicts this. Not even the FAQ.
You're ignoring the rules of shield spikes based on language that is copied and pasted from normal shields. Believe me, I want shield spikes to not be a virtual size increase and I think the rules should be changed to remove the virtual size increase language from shield spikes. I house rule them to not be. But by RAW, because of the fact that the language is there, they are.
Close Combat mastery allows you to use this shield's damage, or you damage, but the amount of damage is not modified by virtual size increases on the shield.
Why should that be the case? The close weapon mastery increases the base damage that should be modified by magic.
I was skeptical myself. I just looked at d20pfsrd. The Brawler text contains extra language.
Brawler, d20pfsrd.com wrote:
When wielding a close weapon, she uses the unarmed strike damage of a brawler 4 levels lower instead of the base damage for that weapon... This ability does not affect any other aspect of the weapon.
Normally, the rest of the text just says you are substituting base damage for base damage, upping the size should work just fine whichever base damage you are using. But the language of it not affecting any other aspect of the weapon does sort of suggest that it wouldn't work with the Bashing Enchantment.
So, just to be on the safe side, to get the 2 size bump, you should take a level in Ranger and use a Wand of Strong Jaw, increasing your Unarmed Strike Base Damage and increasing your Shield Bash Damage that way.
You're ignoring the rules of shield spikes based on language that is copied and pasted from normal shields
Ah, you're confused.
Here is what the shield spiked entry says in the PRD.
Core Rulebook wrote:
Shield Spikes: These spikes turn a shield into a martial piercing weapon and increase the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger than you (see "spiked shields" on Table: Weapons). You can't put spikes on a buckler or a tower shield. Otherwise, attacking with a spiked shield is like making a shield bash attack.
An enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but a spiked shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.
Here is the text from Ultimate Equipment,
Ultimate Equipment wrote:
Shield Bonus —
Deadly spikes and bladed projections extend from some shields, transforming such pieces of armor into weapon in their own right. Shield spikes turn a shield into a martial piercing weapon and increase the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger (see "spiked light shield" and "spiked heavy shield" in the Martial Weapons table). You can't put spikes on a buckler or a tower shield. Otherwise, attacking with a spiked shield is like making a shield bash attack.
An enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but a spiked shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.
The bolded section was added to the Ultimate Equipment. At face value, which is how RAW operates, the spiked shield is its own weapon, not a shield affected by spikes. This treatment of a spike shield, you know, as its own weapon, is affirmed by every Pathfinder product which treats a "spiked shield" as just another weapon. You'll find that Pathfinder consistently will name "spiked shields" as part of weapons lists.
Imbicatus wrote:
But by RAW, because of the fact that the language is there, they are.
By RAW, they are absolutely not included. It's only through RAI that people can argue that they are. And that is done by insisting we ignore the UE text and making statements that the FAQ was posted in response to a thread asking about shield spikes/spiked shields.
Believe me, I want shield spikes to not be a virtual size increase and I think the rules should be changed to remove the virtual size increase language from shield spikes.
I find that a seemingly contradictory statement. Logic for treating spiked shields as their own weapons is right there in front of your face, but you reject it based on what, I'm not exactly sure.
The problem with your request is that they can't remove the "as if" language from shield spikes because that's how you determine the damage for the new weapon you are creating. If your goal is to make sure that spiked versions of shields are proportionally better than the shield upon which they are built, then you have to use die increases. Contrast that with Armor Spikes where there is no base damage for armor without spikes.
The real question you might be asking is why are "shield spikes" a separate thing? Why does the game allow you to build a spiked shield and not just list them with fixed prices?
I don't know. I can speculate that it may have been so that a GM/player could always make a spiked version of any future shields, but there is probably some other reason that is not evident to me.
Shields appear on the martial weapon list in the CRB. They even have the line "the shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right."
You're overlooking one very important thing. The "weapon in its own right" text that I'm referencing occurs in the place where you go to determine how to make the spiked shield. The text is telling us what results.
You're referencing text that talks about enchanting the weapon. The fact that both a shield and a spiked shield can be enchanted as weapons. and share identical text stating so, does not invalidate the fact that a spiked shield is its own weapon. And let me quote you something from the shield spikes entry (all versions)
PRD - Shield Spikes wrote:
An enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but a spiked shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.
The entry for shield spikes specifically talks about enchanting the "spiked shield." It does not talk about enchanting the shield spikes. Why do this? Because the rules are driving home that once you add spikes to a shield, you've created a new weapon --the spiked shield--and it is specifically not to be treated as a shield with spikes on it...at least when it comes to the weapon. And this treatment has been consistent in all books that discuss spiked shields, including the PRD. That is also why the rules tell us that attacking with spiked shield is like making a shield bash. So we know what attack rules are to be used for the new weapon.
Look at this UE entry,
Quote:
SPIKED HEAVY SHIELD
Price 57 GP/70 gp
Type martial
Spiked shields are intimidating weapons, and can have a single protruding central spike, razored shield edges, or a whole forest of deadly protrusions. You can bash with a spiked heavy shield instead of using it for defense. A spiked heavy shield can't be disarmed.
You'll notice that the text never uses the "as if" or virtual language. It does not say "you attack like a heavy shield but as if the weapon was one size larger." If it said that in the weapon's text, then I would 100% agree with you that the FAQ applies.
Yes, there is some confusing language with regard to Masterworks and shield spikes, but no one seems to be able to understand how that is suppose to work.
Ultimate Equipment wrote:
Shield Bonus —
Deadly spikes and bladed projections extend from some shields, transforming such pieces of armor into weapon in their own right. Shield spikes turn a shield into a martial piercing weapon and increase the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger (see "spiked light shield" and "spiked heavy shield" in the Martial Weapons table). You can't put spikes on a buckler or a tower shield. Otherwise, attacking with a spiked shield is like making a shield bash attack.
An enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but a spiked shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.
You're ignoring your own quote, the very next line after what you bolded says
Ultimate Equipment wrote wrote:
Shield spikes turn a shield into a martial piercing weapon and increase the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger (see "spiked light shield" and "spiked heavy shield" in the Martial Weapons table)
You're ignoring your own quote, the very next line after what you bolded says
Ultimate Equipment wrote wrote:
Shield spikes turn a shield into a martial piercing weapon and increase the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger (see "spiked light shield" and "spiked heavy shield" in the Martial Weapons table)
So you think it makes more sense to say,
"as if the spiked shield were designed for a creature one size category larger"
Close Combat mastery allows you to use this shield's damage, or you damage, but the amount of damage is not modified by virtual size increases on the shield.
Why should that be the case? The close weapon mastery increases the base damage that should be modified by magic.
I was skeptical myself. I just looked at d20pfsrd. The Brawler text contains extra language.
Brawler, d20pfsrd.com wrote:
When wielding a close weapon, she uses the unarmed strike damage of a brawler 4 levels lower instead of the base damage for that weapon... This ability does not affect any other aspect of the weapon.
Normally, the rest of the text just says you are substituting base damage for base damage, upping the size should work just fine whichever base damage you are using. But the language of it not affecting any other aspect of the weapon does sort of suggest that it wouldn't work with the Bashing Enchantment.
So, just to be on the safe side, to get the 2 size bump, you should take a level in Ranger and use a Wand of Strong Jaw, increasing your Unarmed Strike Base Damage and increasing your Shield Bash Damage that way.
See I am reading this exact part the opposite: It does not change other aspects of the weapon so the bashing shield is still a bashing shield that still benefits from the size increase.
If it said: This overrides other aspects of the weapon, THEN I'd say bashing would not work.
From the rules perspective bashing and strong jaw are absolutely the same in this case. Both are virtual size increases of two steps. If one works the other has to work, too.
While I disagree with some in this thread that a spiked shield wold not benefit from lead blades, I agree with the responses to the original question.
Based on my reading, the Brawler either gets to use her weapon damage or her unarmed strike damage. If you go with the weapon damage, then whatever modifiers the weapon applies. If you go with unarmed damage, then whatever benefits the unarmed damage applies.
In other words, if you go with the unarmed strike damage, then bashing, spikes, lead blades, etc. do not change the damage die. Think about it...if the weapon itself doesn't change the damage die, then why would a modification of the weapon change it.
Apologies if I have misunderstood what you are asking. It is not my intention to misrepresent your point of view.
Based on my reading, the Brawler either gets to use her weapon damage or her unarmed strike damage. If you go with the weapon damage, then whatever modifiers the weapon applies. If you go with unarmed damage, then whatever benefits the unarmed damage applies.
In other words, if you go with the unarmed strike damage, then bashing, spikes, lead blades, etc. do not change the damage die. Think about it...if the weapon itself doesn't change the damage die, then why would a modification of the weapon change it.
Because the ability states: This ability does not affect any other aspect of the weapon. And the bashing ability is an other aspect of the weapon.
The base damage comes from the close weapon mastery. Everything else as kind of damage (b,p,s), threat range and crit multiplier, as well as weapon special abilities and enchantments remain unchanged.
Close Combat mastery allows you to use this shield's damage, or you damage, but the amount of damage is not modified by virtual size increases on the shield.
Why should that be the case? The close weapon mastery increases the base damage that should be modified by magic.
I was skeptical myself. I just looked at d20pfsrd. The Brawler text contains extra language.
Brawler, d20pfsrd.com wrote:
When wielding a close weapon, she uses the unarmed strike damage of a brawler 4 levels lower instead of the base damage for that weapon... This ability does not affect any other aspect of the weapon.
Normally, the rest of the text just says you are substituting base damage for base damage, upping the size should work just fine whichever base damage you are using. But the language of it not affecting any other aspect of the weapon does sort of suggest that it wouldn't work with the Bashing Enchantment.
So, just to be on the safe side, to get the 2 size bump, you should take a level in Ranger and use a Wand of Strong Jaw, increasing your Unarmed Strike Base Damage and increasing your Shield Bash Damage that way.
See I am reading this exact part the opposite: It does not change other aspects of the weapon so the bashing shield is still a bashing shield that still benefits from the size increase.
If it said: This overrides other aspects of the weapon, THEN I'd say bashing would not work.
From the rules perspective bashing and strong jaw are absolutely the same in this case. Both are virtual size increases of two steps. If one works the other has to work, too.
It does say "This ability does not affect any other aspect of the weapon." It doesn't say, "No other aspect of the weapon affects your damage."
That's the only problem I see with it. Apart from that, you are just substituting Base Damage for Base Damage, and either virtual size increase, from Bashing or Strong Jaw, should work just fine, just like with Warpriest Sacred Weapon Damage or Feral Combat Training before they nerfed it.
Meanwhile, another option would be to just use a Klar. A Klar is technically not a Spiked Shield, and its Shield Bash Damage is 1d6.
That's a valid point and certainly sets up some ambiguity. However, in the case of the spiked shield, the base damage is the damage of the spiked shield. You're not attacking with a shield and then modifying the damage. You're attacking with a 1d4 (light) /1d6 (heavy) weapon.
With the case of spells, I will bet dollars to donuts that the PDT will tell us that what you're modifying is the base damage. So the base damage of the spiked bashing shield is 2d6. That gets swapped out.
For example, let's look at Lead Blades,
PRD - Lead Blades wrote:
For instance, a Medium longsword normally deals 1d8 points of damage, but it would instead deal 2d6 points of damage if benefiting from lead blades.
While we don't see the term "base damage," that's clearly what's being modified.
Look, I can see your point, but my experience with the game and the PDT tells me that they would not agree that Lead Blades would work on the unarmed strike base damage. But I do agree that for consistency, if you improved the base damage for the brawler's unarmed strike, then that should be used.
That's a valid point and certainly sets up some ambiguity. However, in the case of the spiked shield, the base damage is the damage of the spiked shield. You're not attacking with a shield and then modifying the damage. You're attacking with a 1d4 (light) /1d6 (heavy) weapon.
With the case of spells, I will bet dollars to donuts that the PDT will tell us that what you're modifying is the base damage. So the base damage of the spiked bashing shield is 2d6. That gets swapped out.
For example, let's look at Lead Blades,
PRD - Lead Blades wrote:
For instance, a Medium longsword normally deals 1d8 points of damage, but it would instead deal 2d6 points of damage if benefiting from lead blades.
While we don't see the term "base damage," that's clearly what's being modified.
Look, I can see your point, but my experience with the game and the PDT tells me that they would not agree that Lead Blades would work on the unarmed strike base damage. But I do agree that for consistency, if you improved the base damage for the brawler's unarmed strike, then that should be used.
Lead Blades and Unarmed strikes have a completely other problem. Lead Blades augments every weapon you are "carrying."
Lead Blades and Unarmed strikes have a completely other problem. Lead Blades augments every weapon you are "carrying."
But you are carrying the shield. If Lead Blades simply gave you a +1 to hit on weapons you were "carrying" then it should still work if you substitute in your unarmed strike base damage.
What I believe JaG is arguing is that you're still using the weapon, just you get to start with the base damage of your unarmed strike...and then apply things like Lead Blades or Bashing. But it's my opinion that when you cast LBs, you've modified the base damage of your weapon and that base damage is swapped out if you use the unarmed strike base damage.
Your brawler close combat damage is separate and distinct from the shield damage. It does not matter whether you bash with a light shield or a heavy shield you still deal the same damage. If you find out a way to wield a colossal heavy shield it still won't affect your close combat damage. bashing and lead blades specifically enhances the shields damage. It has absolutely no effect on your close combat damage.
Anything that enhances the shields base damage by pretty much any means I can think of has no effect on your close combat damage.
Now if it makes you or your close combat damage deal damage as if a size larger, that'll work.
Lead Blades and Unarmed strikes have a completely other problem. Lead Blades augments every weapon you are "carrying."
But you are carrying the shield. If Lead Blades simply gave you a +1 to hit on weapons you were "carrying" then it should still work if you substitute in your unarmed strike base damage.
What I believe JaG is arguing is that you're still using the weapon, just you get to start with the base damage of your unarmed strike...and then apply things like Lead Blades or Bashing. But it's my opinion that when you cast LBs, you've modified the base damage of your weapon and that base damage is swapped out if you use the unarmed strike base damage.
But we were talking about using Lead Blades to up your Unarmed Strike Damage, and then applying that to your shield. And the wording of Lead Blades does arguably allow for the interpretation of excluding Unarmed Strikes, even those of Monk and Brawler whose Unarmed Strikes count as manufactured weapons.
I think that interpretation is stupid, but I feel obliged to weigh the RAW.
dragonhunterq wrote:
Your brawler close combat damage is separate and distinct from the shield damage.
No, it isn't. It is enmeshed.
dragonhunterq wrote:
It does not matter whether you bash with a light shield or a heavy shield you still deal the same damage.
True, the base damage is being replaced.
dragonhunterq wrote:
bashing and lead blades specifically enhances the shields damage.
Bashing and Lead Blades are nothing like Close Combat Damage, Sacred Weapon Damage, or Feral Combat Training damage from back when you could use the FCT Feat to apply Monk Unarmed Strike Damage to your Natural Attack.
With Close Combat and Sacred Weapon, you are replacing one Base Damage with another. With Bashing, Strong Jaw, and Lead Blades, you are applying a virtual size increase. Virtual Size Increases do stack with Base Damage. Specifically, Monk, Brawler, and Sacred Weapon Base Damages also stack with virtual size increases.
As best as I can tell, by RAW,
Bashing wrote:
A bashing shield deals damage as if it were two size categories larger
So, can you cite RAW that states that Close Combat Damage or Sacred Weapon Damage are exceptions to the rule? If you look again at the Bashing description, I think you will find that this Virtual Size Increase is broadly worded. The VSI applies to all the damage the shield does.
it never wrote:
A bashing shield increases its Shield Base damage by 2 size catagories
Bashing Shields enhance ALL the damage the shield does, not just the shield base damage. Actually, it even enhances the damage done when throwing the shield! I just don't know where to find any RAW that makes Close Combat or Sacred Weapon damage a shield does and exception to what
Bashing wrote:
A bashing shield deals damage as if it were two size categories larger
But we were talking about using Lead Blades to up your Unarmed Strike Damage, and then applying that to your shield.
I did not interpret Just A Guess' as asserting such. I don't think anyone has argued that lead blades improves unarmed strike damage. My impression from his posts is that he believes the unarmed strike damage becomes the base damage for the shield. Then, you apply lead blades. My belief is that the PDT would say any change to the damage die of the shield is part of the shield's base damage that gets swapped out. So lead blades applies first, then you do the unarmed damage swap, which means you get no benefit from lead blades or bashing, if you use your unarmed strake damage in place of your weapon damage.
