Is the Unhindered Shield feat Too Good? (Armor Master's Handbook)


Pathfinder Player Companion

151 to 200 of 388 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mrakvampire wrote:

It keeps going over and over again.

Just please, please, please read the rules. Animated shield requires and activation (move action), work only for 4 rounds, and have a cost of +2. Why do you compare just 1 (one!) feat with this, I do not understand

4 rounds is on the long end of the average encounter in Pathfinder. You have your dancer up for the whole fight. I thought you said a few k is nothing at level 12-13? It's just a +2, and doesn't even eat a pair of feats.

Quote:
I do not care if shields are already weak. I do not care if you could have taken Dodge. I don't care if you can, or can't apply shield bonus vs rays, etc.

and that is where you went wrong. There are plenty of abilities, items and effects in Pathfinder that are, for lack of a better term, "underpowered". A common fix we used to see in 4e was exactly this: tax "fixes" such as that one feat that grows to +2 and +3 attack after it was realized offense wasn't keeping up with basic levelling and the 3 "+1" feats were too exorbitant a cost.

Shields are no good, this helps them be of use sometimes when the shield gets to apply and instead of putting it to use people get a conniption.

Not like it'll help when the bear-druid casts Flamestrike(something he coincidentally gets to do for just one feat!), and you could've had fortification on your armor already; don't pretend it was impossible without a shield; I can't remember the last time I saw a two-hander user that didn't have it "despite no shield"


Blackwaltzomega wrote:

Um, you do realize everything past +2 AC on this is purely a function of GOLD and not the feat itself, right?

It is not.

Without this feat this amount of gold can't give you +6 AC. Try and you will fail.

Blackwaltzomega wrote:


I mean, by this logic Weapon Specialization gives you +7 damage and the power to pierce miss chances for one feat because you're using a +5 Heartseeker Sword.

You completely miss my point it seems. This feat allows you to do something that was it not available. It's not simple +1 or +2 bonus. It's new possibility to have a scaling bonus. Up to +6 AC.

Even worse, you can get this with Magic Vestment for free, if you are so worried about wealth, for god's sake.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

You are being deliberate with attempts misdirection and appeals.

What's your angle, really? What characters, specifically, are about to be affected by this feat, and *why* is it pissing you off so?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mrakvampire wrote:
Tuvarkz wrote:
Because as I've stated a couple posts before, Fighter is better off with Shield Brace

Ok you compare one similary broken feat with another to provide argument that this feat is actually balanced? How nice.

Usually something NEW is compared with something OLD, but who am I after all to tell you this.

No, I brought up Shield Brace because you asked why Kensai Magus and not Fighter McFighterson. Want a fair comparison? Well then, again as I mentioned a few posts ago. Skill Focus: Knowledge (Any)+Eldritch Heritage (Arcana), or Iron Will+Familiar, or Extra Arcana>Familiar if you're a Magus. You grab a Hawk with Protector archetype, retrain that useless Weapon Finesse because Familiars get Dex to attack rolls from being familiars into Additional Traits, pick something to boost the hawk's saves and then Helpful trait, which boosts the Aid Another bonus to +3. Now, Mister familiar is providing you with a) Against 4 attacks per round, 95% chance to increase your AC by 3; b) 50% additional health pool at later levels from splitting damage, c) take the full brunt of an attack (plus any rider effects) as an immediate action . How much additional gold does this cost? 0 gold, or 200 gold x level (which caps at a very affordable 4k gold at 20th) if you lose your familiar. See level 12, 25k vs 2400 gp if you get your familiar gibbed or fireballed.


Jamie Charlan wrote:


4 rounds is on the long end of the average encounter in Pathfinder. You have your dancer up for the whole fight. I thought you said a few k is nothing at level 12-13? It's just a +2, and doesn't even eat a pair of feats.

Ok, 4 rounds then?

You spend your first round on activation of animated shield and can only move or single attack. So you basically lose something like (again) 20 or 25% of your action economy.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Tuvarkz wrote:
Mrakvampire wrote:
Tuvarkz wrote:

Let's do some numbers for a Human Kensai magus (Because Fighter level -3 at 7th). At 7th level, he becomes able to pick Unhindered Shield.

Naturally, this means that of his 6 feats, he's spent half of them, plus around 16% of his WBL to get a +2 buckler, earning him a +4 to AC. Naturally, this means that not only he's been leveling with two dead feat slots until then, but that he could've earned his protector familiar for one feat instead and just be at 1 AC lower four times per round (And getting attacked more than that during a turn is generally a sign that things are already going to hell).
Because of how much a character will be spending on improving his shield, the bonus won't scale to +5 until 9th, +6 until 12th, and +7 until 15th, assuming a considerable investment into keeping that buckler on par.

Why do you calculate this for kensai?

Just take two-handed fighter and calculate how awesome he is right now with this feat just for 25k gold that is negligible by 12-13 level.
Because as I've stated a couple posts before, Fighter is better off with Shield Brace since the nodachi as a weapon provides better DPR than a greatsword and is also a polearm. Also, by level 12-13, 25k gp is 25% and 18% of the WBL respectively, not a neglible amount of gold by any means. And then, for those same two feats, you can pickup Difficult Swings/Cut from the Air, which basically make you harder to full attack against enemies of the same size (Your local friendly wizard will do the Enlarge Person when needed) and enough ranged attack parries that the enemy archers won't be a problem either.

Interesting. Nodachi is a loophole weapon. It has the exact same stats as an Elven Curve Blade, but is not an exotic weapon. Must be the lack of finessable. It should be a sword.

And we aren't going to calculate the costs for having a wizard following you around to cast Enlarge on you.

Do you take the ACP for the shield with Shield Brace? I do note the restriction to polearms and spears. And you do know that since both cost 1 feat for a fighter, they are effectively identical in cost and in effect, but no weapons restriction. If you are fighting skeletons, you are in trouble.
------
As for the opportunity cost of the feat...Difficult Swings, ehhh, I'll take +3 to +7 AC. Cut from the air is good if you are facing archers...so is another +3 to +7 AC, and doesn't require a parry roll to succeed, or use AoO's.

==Aelryinth


Tuvarkz wrote:
No, I brought up Shield Brace because you asked why Kensai Magus and not Fighter McFighterson. Want a fair comparison? Well then, again as I mentioned a few posts ago. Skill Focus: Knowledge (Any)+Eldritch Heritage (Arcana), or Iron Will+Familiar, or Extra Arcana>Familiar if you're a Magus. You grab a Hawk with Protector archetype, retrain that useless Weapon Finesse because Familiars get Dex to attack rolls from being familiars into Additional Traits, pick something to boost the hawk's saves and then Helpful trait, which boosts the Aid Another bonus to +3. Now, Mister familiar is providing you with a) Against 4 attacks per round, 95% chance to increase your AC by 3; b) 50% additional health pool at later levels from splitting damage, c) take the full brunt of an attack (plus any rider effects) as an immediate action . How much additional gold does this cost? 0 gold, or 200 gold x level (which caps at a very affordable 4k gold at 20th) if you lose your familiar. See level 12, 25k vs 2400 gp if you get your familiar gibbed or fireballed.

I'm not sure why I'm reading this at all.

You are saying that this feat is balanced. This feat is not only for Magus, actually it's primarily for fighters. Why do always need to compare this feat with casters?
Ok compare this feat with 9th level spell that wizard gets without even spending single feat. Whats the purpose of this exercise?


Jamie Charlan wrote:

You are being deliberate with attempts misdirection and appeals.

What's your angle, really? What characters, specifically, are about to be affected by this feat, and *why* is it pissing you off so?

I said multiple times that this feat is a new no-brainer must have for every martial character that goes for two-handed or two-weapon fighting.

If you like power creep like this (compare this feat with Two-weapon defense from Core, lol) - fine, it's your choice. But I yet to see an argument with proper feat to feat comparison that this feat, that can grant up to +6 AC is balanced versus other feats for martial characters that want to use greatsword for example or Valeros the fighter.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jamie Charlan wrote:

Shields are no good, this helps them be of use sometimes when the shield gets to apply and instead of putting it to use people get a conniption.

Not like it'll help when the bear-druid casts Flamestrike(something he coincidentally gets to do for just one feat!), and you could've had fortification on your armor already; don't pretend it was impossible without a shield; I can't remember the last time I saw a two-hander user that didn't have it "despite no shield"

1) Faulty logic. This doesn't make shields good. This makes builds that DID NOT USE SHIELDS even BETTER. It does absolutely nothing for shield users.

That's your disconnect.

2) But did that 2h'er also have Ghost Ward, Imperivous and Guardian on his armor, also?

No? Oh, because now he has ANOTHER ITEM SLOT which gives him that protection, too.

Shield users get NOTHING out of this feat. It's good for builds which formerly COULD NOT USE SHIELDS.

It's have your cake and eat it, too. BLeh. It was broken in 3.5, and it's broken here.

As for a familiar...That's a very useful choice, but the AC bonus is less from the get go, limited in the number of attacks, and yes, it IS more likely to die then a buckler is to get sundered. It also has other uses.
I'm not sure of the feat cost to get and advance a familiar, but I do know it's a General Feat, not a combat feat. Or are you now restricting every Fighter build to Eldritch Guardian archetypes?

==Aelryinth


Eh, Aelrynth, funny thing is the time I built a character with this stuff, I took all Shield Brace, Cut+Smash from the Air, and the PoW feat for Shield to Touch AC. DM was in a "ranged touch attack with rider effect" mood. Of course, said character got rekt after a couple weeks when DM decided that ranged touch wasn't putting us at danger anymore and gave us no-save wisdom damage spam+confusion and other maladys.
EDIT: And the nodachi is a sword, heavy blades group. It's just in the polearm group as well.

Mrakvampire wrote:


I'm not sure why I'm reading this at all.

You are saying that this feat is balanced. This feat is not only for Magus, actually it's primarily for fighters. Why do always need to compare this feat with casters?
Ok compare this feat with 9th level spell that wizard gets without even spending single feat. Whats the purpose of this exercise?

Because the Magus is the single biggest beneficiary of Unhindered Shield? Unless I've been missing something, I don't see how Unchained Monks really get that yuuge of an improvement when they are already sinking tons into their WBL to keep that amulet of mighty fists up to par. Unhindered Shield is for Magi/UMonk/Any other class that ends up needing a free hand. Fightans and other 2handers only need Shield Brace+a trusted nodachi. Well, maybe there's Archer Fighters, but this would be a really really situational pick for them.

I've brought up the Protector Familiar. Tell me how effective +3 to AC and 50% more HP (which helps against all sources of damage, not only AC-targetting stuff) for minimal if any cost isn't better than investment-necessary +6 to AC.


Aelryinth wrote:


1) Faulty logic. This doesn't make shields good. This makes builds that DID NOT USE SHIELDS even BETTER. It does absolutely nothing for shield users.
That's your disconnect.

They *ARE* Shield users now.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tuvarkz wrote:
Fightans and other 2handers only need Shield Brace+a trusted nodachi.

Ok, try to read it slowly.

Why do you compare one BROKEN feat with another BROKEN feat from the same supplement? BOTH these feats are broken as hell, why you keep arguing that no, they aren't and then provide argument based on another similar broken feat? I just do not understand you.


Mrakvampire wrote:
Tuvarkz wrote:
Fightans and other 2handers only need Shield Brace+a trusted nodachi.

Ok, try to read it slowly.

Why do you compare one BROKEN feat with another BROKEN feat from the same supplement? BOTH these feats are broken as hell, why you keep arguing that no, they aren't and then provide argument based on another similar broken feat? I just do not understand you.

Because I am not putting those two feats in comparison of each other directly on whether Shield Brace may or not be more or less broken than Unhindered Shield? You keep questioning why I am not bringing up Fighters for Unhindered Shield and keep bringing up the Magus. It's because the Fighter has close to 0 use for Unhindered Shield. And again, I point to Protector Familiar angrily.

This is the same amount of feats, Shield Focus+Shield Brace/Unhindered Shield, and SFocus+Eldritch Heritage or Iron Will+Improved Familiar, and both provide substantial defensive benefits (I double dare you to say +50% HP and +3 to AC isn't just as big a boost if not better because it has wider situations in which it is applicable.) Why aren't you discussing a Familiar at all?


5 people marked this as a favorite.

How in the blue Hell are these 'Broken,' when they live in the same part of the game as Leadership, Dazing Spell, and Prone Shooter?


Jamie Charlan wrote:
They *ARE* Shield users now.

Ok, I see. We just don't like those stupid fighters that y'know use old good shields and longswords. Mock them. Humiliate them.

We can wield greataxes AND shields now. Hahaha.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
How in the blue Hell are these 'Broken,' when they live in the same part of the game as Leadership, Dazing Spell, and Prone Shooter?

You point is that if we already have broken feats, like Dazing Spell, we should have more broken feats? Ooookay.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

"Players: Feats kind of suck, and many are under-powered or require far too many prerequisites.

Paizo: We hear you, have some feats that are actually pretty cool and worthwhile.

Players: OMG OP PLZ NERF!"

And this is why we can't have nice things.


No, I'm calling you on the ridiculousness of your standards.

This is a GOOD FEAT, not a BROKEN FEAT. It allows for classes that had no real way to get Shield bonuses, and were effectively permanently locked out of the benefits of those bonuses, a way to get them. Potentially for the cost of three Feats, or being forced to multiclass to get it down to two Feats.


Tuvarkz wrote:
Why aren't you discussing a Familiar at all?

Because I don't care.

We are discussing martial feats for martial characters, not OP spells, OP familiars, etc.
I know that casters have nasty tricks, why do you keep derailing this thread to martial vs caster arguments?
Yes, Familiar Folio in my opinion has some too powerfull stuff (this archtype is an example), but I DO NOT CARE.

This feat is mainly for fighters, so I dare you to finally stop arguing about Magus and start thinking how these feats change fighter gameplay.

I repeat only for 1 feat fighter with greataxe can potentially get a +6 AC bonus. Please advice, do we have comparable option for fighter with a greataxe to have +6 AC just for 1 feat?


Wrap your pointy head around this: This Feat is really not meant for Fighters. Not everything in the Armor Master's Handbook, or the Weapon Master's Handbook, for that matter, was written solely for Fighters.


Prince Yyrkoon wrote:

"Players: Feats kind of suck, and many are under-powered or require far too many prerequisites.

Paizo: We hear you, have some feats that are actually pretty cool and worthwhile.

Players: OMG OP PLZ NERF!"

And this is why we can't have nice things.

"Players: Shield and sword kind of suck, and many builds are under-powered or require far too many prerequisites.

Paizo: Lolwut, we hate you, now we give free shield bonus just for fun to those raging greataxe wielding barbarians. And you can still feel bad and humiliated, hahaha.

Players: OMG IT IS SO BALANCED!"

And this is why we can't have nice things.

P.S. I actually like Paizo and all people that work for it, it's just a remake of a bad joke by Prince Yyrkoon.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

So can a natural weapon weapon fighting style ranger or beast totem barbarian get the buckler AC bonus, make both their claw attacks AND not take any minus to hit? That's pretty sweet....


Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
Wrap your pointy head around this: This Feat is really not meant for Fighters. Not everything in the Armor Master's Handbook, or the Weapon Master's Handbook, for that matter, was written solely for Fighters.

Really? Why do you think so?

They even get them without Shield Focus req.


Mrakvampire wrote:
Tuvarkz wrote:
Why aren't you discussing a Familiar at all?

Because I don't care.

We are discussing martial feats for martial characters, not OP spells, OP familiars, etc.
I know that casters have nasty tricks, why do you keep derailing this thread to martial vs caster arguments?
Yes, Familiar Folio in my opinion has some too powerfull stuff (this archtype is an example), but I DO NOT CARE.

This feat is mainly for fighters, so I dare you to finally stop arguing about Magus and start thinking how these feats change fighter gameplay.

I repeat only for 1 feat fighter with greataxe can potentially get a +6 AC bonus. Please advice, do we have comparable option for fighter with a greataxe to have +6 AC just for 1 feat?

Because the Fighter can, and already could choose to pick up a familiar. Tell me where the Familiar Bond feat requires you to be a spellcaster. Tell me where Eldritch Heritage requires you to be a spellcaster (Well, it does ask for 13 Charisma and that means you end up losing 7 points worth of point buy). Heck, because Iron Will is already a somewhat solid feat for fighters and worth its investment, Familiar Bond is a single feat investment that nets you an equal or better survivability boost than Unhindered Shield at no cost.

Also, it's not just "Barbarian can wield a shield now too" but "You can wield a twohanded sword with your shield too." ((Limited to a Nodachi if you want to get the most of it but oh well)).


Tuvarkz wrote:

Bond is a single feat investment that nets you an equal or better survivability boost than Unhindered Shield at no cost.

Ok, fine let us talk about familiars.

1. You don't get deliver touch spells therefore you won't get Shield Master

2. You don't get spell resistance therefore you won't get In
Harm’s Way


Mrakvampire wrote:
Tuvarkz wrote:

Bond is a single feat investment that nets you an equal or better survivability boost than Unhindered Shield at no cost.

Ok, fine let us talk about familiars.

1. You don't get deliver touch spells therefore you won't get Shield Master

2. You don't get spell resistance therefore you won't get In
Harm’s Way

Hm, although there's this precedent http://paizo.com/products/btpy8w7p/discuss&page=8?Pathfinder-Player-Com panion-Animal-Archive#372 for an animal companion that lacks share spells. Although not technically official errata, it's been posted by the book's author and thus it should be something to be considered as a common-sense fix. Applying the same principle, Protector familiars still get the full array of abilities.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Jamie Charlan wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:


1) Faulty logic. This doesn't make shields good. This makes builds that DID NOT USE SHIELDS even BETTER. It does absolutely nothing for shield users.
That's your disconnect.
They *ARE* Shield users now.

Exactly. It makes them shield users without having to give up anything...like the damage shield users have traditionally forgone, or the number of attacks if they choose not to go TWF with mismatched weapons.

Look at the familiar example above. THat buffs SHIELD USERS TOO. They get the exact same benefit out of it that everyone else does. Trying to make it a 'comparison feat' is shooting wide the target. Everyone benefits equally from the familiar feat.

The only ones that benefit from Unhindered Shield are TWF guys and 2h'ers. Sword and board users get nothing but dust.

As someone else noted...a counter feat to give sword and board users 2h dmg for str and power attack while wielding a weapon one-handed is the exact equivalent of this feat on the other side.

Seriously, if you just want all melee combat styles to include Shield AC, give +1 Shield AC /3 BAB to EVERYONE. EEsh.

==Aelryinth


What's that druid giving up to cast spells as a T-Rex?

Exactly one feat.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Yeah, and people don't think Natural SPell isn't a tremendously overpowered feat, doing what Still Spell and Silent Spell do for basically one class.

You know in 3e it was a +3LA Metamagic feat, right? They changed it to +0 in 3.5, and it promptly became 'the feat' for all druids. Made even worse in that it won't work for polymorphed people.

And the Nodachi should be an EWP, like the katana, naginata, and curve blade are. You're basically using a mispriced weapon to make an argument there, Tuv. :) It's better then a falchion, but does the same thing...it should be an EWP.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:

Yeah, and people don't think Natural SPell isn't a tremendously overpowered feat, doing what Still Spell and Silent Spell do for basically one class.

You know in 3e it was a +3LA Metamagic feat, right? They changed it to +0 in 3.5, and it promptly became 'the feat' for all druids. Made even worse in that it won't work for polymorphed people.

And the Nodachi should be an EWP, like the katana, naginata, and curve blade are. You're basically using a mispriced weapon to make an argument there, Tuv. :) It's better then a falchion, but does the same thing...it should be an EWP.

==Aelryinth

The Naginata is a martial weapon, as is the Katana when used two-handed.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

The nodachi is one die step lower than the greatsword but gets +1 to its crit range.

And you want that to get nerfed too?

You keep bringing up the curve blade, but curve blades are finesseable, that's the main reason it's considered exotic.

I'm increasingly stunned at how much some people hate martial characters, honestly.

Silver Crusade

13 people marked this as a favorite.

So for 2 feats and 25k, you get +6 AC. That's +6 AC that doesn't apply to touch AC either.

That's it, right?

So for 7k more, you could have +4 that DOES apply to touch with a ring of protection. Sure, the shield bonus stacks, but it's also a worse bonus to AC that's diverting WBL.

I mean if you wanted to use a buckler for an enhancement sponge, you could do that already, it's just a -1 to attacks, and you could throw determined on it just the same as well as any skill booster like slick/shadow/etc for the same cost, you're just down 1k gold for a +1 that has ACP 0.

Is the ceiling of broken really so low that THIS is being considered unfair, giving shield wielders some extra defense?

Like for people who want to compare it to a dancing shield, dancing is trash, but I've seen "you compare broken to broken" without "you compare trash to garbage" in this conversation. This is a good feat, probably a solid pick for THF/Magi, but broken? I don't see it.


Mrakvampire wrote:
Tuvarkz wrote:
Why aren't you discussing a Familiar at all?

Because I don't care.

We are discussing martial feats for martial characters, not OP spells, OP familiars, etc.
I know that casters have nasty tricks, why do you keep derailing this thread to martial vs caster arguments?
Yes, Familiar Folio in my opinion has some too powerfull stuff (this archtype is an example), but I DO NOT CARE.

This feat is mainly for fighters, so I dare you to finally stop arguing about Magus and start thinking how these feats change fighter gameplay.

I repeat only for 1 feat fighter with greataxe can potentially get a +6 AC bonus. Please advice, do we have comparable option for fighter with a greataxe to have +6 AC just for 1 feat?

Dodge (one feat) gauntlets of defence +5 all core.

Edit: or any feat that grants a +1 AC bonus and then spend gp.
Animated shield no feat, just gp


N. Jolly wrote:
I mean if you wanted to use a buckler for an enhancement sponge, you could do that already, it's just a -1 to attacks

Have you read the rules? No, really, have you read the rules actually before posting in this thread?

Quote:
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 AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn.
Quote:
Is the ceiling of broken really so low that THIS is being considered unfair, giving shield wielders some extra defense?

What?! This feat do nothing for shield wielders. This feat gives tonn of AC for people that previously couldn't effectively use a shield! Why is this so difficult? Sword and shield style = gets nothing. Two-handers = BINGO. Two-weapons = BINGO.

Quote:
Like for people who want to compare it to a dancing shield, dancing is trash, but I've seen "you compare broken to broken" without "you compare trash to garbage" in this conversation. This is a good feat, probably a solid pick for THF/Magi, but broken? I don't see it.

Ok, +6 to AC is just solid. I'm curious what do you think is OP then. Only something like Pun-Pun in 3.5, everything less than it is ok?


Nevan Oaks wrote:

Dodge (one feat) gauntlets of defence +5 all core.

Edit: or any feat that grants a +1 AC bonus and then spend gp.
Animated shield no feat, just gp

Sigh

You have to actually use gauntlets to have a bonus to AC, so no free +5 to AC here.
Read a FAQ.

Spend gp? Please be more specific. +6 of stackable AC. I dare you.

Whole thing with this damned buckler even doesn't require any gold investment. Just ask party cleric to use Magic Vestment for those extra free of charge AC points.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Mrakvampire wrote:
Have you read the rules? No, really, have you read the rules actually before posting in this thread?

Wow, are you seriously this heated about this? Like I even asked if I had it right when I posted, and here you are attacking me for this question.

Quote:
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 AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn.

Yeah, I know how shields work. It's a moderate AC boost, cool. Not really sure what your point is here aside from quoting rules text.

Quote:
What?! This feat do nothing for shield wielders. This feat gives tonn of AC for people that previously couldn't effectively use a shield! Why is this so difficult? Sword and shield style = gets nothing. Two-handers = BINGO. Two-weapons = BINGO.

+6 AC is tons? That's a nice boost to me, and seriously if it were a scaling bonus that slowly gave this on top of normal bonuses, I might be slightly in agreement, but it's not. It's a +2 with a gold cost to make it more relevant, that's it. Not a high gold cost, but still a gold cost.

Quote:
Ok, +6 to AC is just solid. I'm curious what do you think is OP then. Only something like Pun-Pun in 3.5, everything less than it is ok?

I don't know how someone not being amazed at AC bonuses is shocking to you. Or why you're stretching to Pun Pun. If it gave bonuses to fort or will save, which by the time this comes on line are more relevant defenses, it'd be OP. Giving Barbarian DR? Yeah, OP. Giving +6 AC isn't OP, it's a relatively good feat.

Let me ask you here, what benefit would the feat have to give for you to consider it fair? At what point does it step beyond good and into Pun Pun territory as you have put it. I mean I've seen OP things, I've written guides which help you do those very things (Alchemist with poisoner's gloves and RAW Potion Glutton for one), and this feat would probably end up as green in my guides, blue on a defensive THF build.

Also you keep bringing up magic vestments and assuming it's a given. It's not, it's a spell which is its own investment, so I'm not sure why you continue to think it's relevant to this feat. Also as an aside about the gauntlet, you could use it as the last attack in a full attack or TWF and get the benefit, so if you're high enough level to care (probably once you have a 3rd attack), the gauntlet strategy works just fine, as it's being 'used' for the purposes of the gauntlet, although super polite how you don't link to the relevant FAQ when berating someone for being unaware of it.


N. Jolly wrote:


Yeah, I know how shields work. It's a moderate AC boost, cool. Not really sure what your point is here aside from quoting rules text.

Name a good AC boost for martial character.

N. Jolly wrote:
+6 AC is tons? That's a nice boost to me, and seriously if it were a scaling bonus that slowly gave this on top of normal bonuses, I might be slightly in agreement, but it's not. It's a +2 with a gold cost to make it more relevant, that's it. Not a high gold cost, but still a gold cost.

Yes, it is tons. Name a feat that can potentially grant at least +5 AC, then we will talk.

N. Jolly wrote:
I don't know how someone not being amazed at AC bonuses is shocking to you. Or why you're stretching to Pun Pun. If it gave bonuses to fort or will save, which by the time this comes on line are more relevant defenses, it'd be OP. Giving Barbarian DR? Yeah, OP. Giving +6 AC isn't OP, it's a relatively good feat....

By what time? This feat can be taken at early levels.

Take a look on Bestiary. How many monsters attack AC? A lot of them.
Why do I even need to stress this out? It is just 1 (one!) feat. And this feat completely shut down any viability of sword and shield style in combat.
And btw, Magic Vestment is not an investment. It's just a spell of 3rd level. Even in mid game these slots are like dirt.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A +5 Animated Heavy Steel Shield gets you +7 stackable AC...

That's more expensive, of course, though the +3 version (and +5 AC) costs an identical amount of GP and could be combined with, say, Dodge.

I can get +2 AC off a single Feat a couple of ways, too, which would combine to give a stackable +4 with no GP cost associated for 2 Feats...and 26k can get you +3 AC a few different ways at most levels of play.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
A +5 Animated Heavy Steel Shield gets you +7 stackable AC...

Again.

Ok, I'm patient.
Animated shield requires:
1. Move action to activate
2. Works only 4 rounds

Saying that, you lose from 20% to 25% of your combat action economy in any average Pathfinder fight.

It is NOT the same as constant +6 AC without need to activate anything or duration restrictions.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's +7, not +6. Don't forget Shield Focus.

And a 'moderate' AC boost. Mmm, yeah. Moderate, all right, sure. I think we already posted how huge a swing in damage mitigation +7 to AC can be for CR 20 monsters. Going from 50% hits to 15% hits. Yeah, moderate.

Which shield users already knew, and its why they gave up damage for it. Now, I guess you don't have to give up damage at all, and nobody needs to build a Shield Bash build for crappy TWF synergy anymore.

I'm not sure where this +4 bonus you're talking about is coming from, Jolly. Costwise, it's not going to happen. You're going to have a +5 shield and armor set before you have a +3 amulet and ring (because it costs 10k for 1 pt of ac, going from +2 to +3 for Nat Armor and Deflection, but it only costs 9k each to go from +4 to +5 for the armor and shield).

As for the nodachi...it's got the damage of a bastard sword, with a better threat range. It's absolutely better then a falchion. It should be an exotic weapon by that standard. The curveblade being finessable is on top of that. There's a reason Tuv picked that specific weapon...it VERY SPECIFICALLY is the best 2h weapon of its type...and its a polearm, too!

At least the naginata only does a d8, it's just equal to a scythe.

==Aelryinth

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

So you're still not answering my question, what would be the baseline where this feat would be 'balanced' to you? Do we compare it against CRB feats? Because comparing most things to Dodge is going to make them look strong. I don't consider +6 AC (eventually and with investment) to be broken. The most dangerous effects in the late game are save or lose/die/suck effects, and sure, you'll get some on a successful hit, but by the time this feat is working at full power, saves are more important defensively.

Also the +4 I was talking about was from a ring of deflection at 32k.

Maybe I just don't value AC as much as others in this thread since everything being discussed here is how to get the most possible AC without any concerns for offense, which to me doesn't make an intimidating character. I'm willing to admit I value saves way above AC myself, and this is a good feat for a THF/TWF, but I'm just not seeing broken here compared to anything that other classes get.

We're boosting the mundane here, which to me is a net win.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, like I said, I can think of ways spend two Feats and get +4 AC sans GP costs (or at least without any you wouldn't spend anyway).

If getting into class specific stuff, it gets even worse. Beast Totem is eventually +6 AC, and I mentioned Defensive Weapon Training being +4 already.

Both of those are one Feat away. Combined with a Feat for +2 AC, that's either +6 or +8 depending on which ability we're talking. Now, those are Class specific, but they also don't cost any GP...

Really, these are good Feats, more convenient than many others for getting AC up...but broken? Nah. You need to be way better than the alternatives for that, and this is only a little bit better, if that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
N. Jolly wrote:

So you're still not answering my question, what would be the baseline where this feat would be 'balanced' to you? Do we compare it against CRB feats? Because comparing most things to Dodge is going to make them look strong. I don't consider +6 AC (eventually and with investment) to be broken. The most dangerous effects in the late game are save or lose/die/suck effects, and sure, you'll get some on a successful hit, but by the time this feat is working at full power, saves are more important defensively.

It is a reason to grant huge chunk of AC for free?

Why only +6, not +60? As you've said, saves are more important by late game. Why at all bother with game mechanics? Just remove all monsters that try (hahaha, non-optimized losers) to attack your AC, like golems, etc.

In game design when you create something, you need to closely compare it with existing options. If some option is so powerful that it is considered must have, then this option is broken, because this is not an option anymore, it is a tax.

N. Jolly wrote:


but I'm just not seeing broken here compared to anything that other classes get.

I'm still waiting for a feat that grants similar amount to AC from earlier books from you.

N. Jolly wrote:


We're boosting the mundane here, which to me is a net win.

No we are not. We are killing entire combat style here.


Deadmanwalking wrote:

Well, like I said, I can think of ways spend two Feats and get +4 AC sans GP costs (or at least without any you wouldn't spend anyway).

If getting into class specific stuff, it gets even worse. Beast Totem is eventually +6 AC, and I mentioned Defensive Weapon Training being +4 already.

Both of those are one Feat away. Combined with a Feat for +2 AC, that's either +6 or +8 depending on which ability we're talking. Now, those are Class specific, but they also don't cost any GP...

Really, these are good Feats, more convenient than many others for getting AC up...but broken? Nah. You need to be way better than the alternatives for that, and this is only a little bit better, if that.

Ok, now we started to compare feats with class abilities. What's next? Feats with 9th level spells?

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Mrakvampire wrote:
Ok, now we started to compare feats with class abilities. What's next? Feats with 9th level spells?

Those are both Class Abilities that can be purchased as Feats. They're as valid an example as Weapon Specialization.

What Feat gets you 9th level spells, again?


Deadmanwalking wrote:


Those are both Class Abilities that can be purchased as Feats.

Can you please specify a feat that grants Rage Power of 6th level barbarian for a fighter? Probably I've missed a really powerful feat over there.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mrakvampire wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:


Those are both Class Abilities that can be purchased as Feats.
Can you please specify a feat that grants Rage Power of 6th level barbarian for a fighter? Probably I've missed a really powerful feat over there.

That would be why I followed up with the Weapon Specialization reference. To make it clear they were still Class specific.

Though, as stated, Defensive Weapon Training is a Fighter thing...

And actually, the Viking Archetype allows exactly what you describe (Beast Totem + Fighter). For reference.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Mrakvampire wrote:

It is a reason to grant huge chunk of AC for free?

Why only +6, not +60? As you've said, saves are more important by late game. Why at all bother with game mechanics? Just remove all monsters that try (hahaha, non-optimized losers) to attack your AC, like golems, etc.

In game design when you create something, you need to closely compare it with existing options. If some option is so powerful that it is considered must have, then this option is broken, because this is not an option anymore, it is a tax.

So you're just going to spout hyperbole now? Or is this slippery slope at this point? Also as an aside, golems also have abilities that target saves, as to most high level creatures. Having a defense that's good against one thing but isn't against another is pretty standard in this game.

I'll agree that there's no feat like this, it's probably more powerful than a good number of feats. What that says to me is that a good number of feats are just bad. You're accepting that the baseline of feats is a good place, while I don't believe that at all. I don't think it's mandatory for THF either. It's a good feat for them, but I don't think it comes close to being a must have, as I stated earlier. If you want AC, it's nice. If you want to do something offensive and don't have as much concern for your AC, it's meh.

And as for killing sword and board, sword and board was NEVER good. Not in CRB, not before this, and not after. TWF with two of the same weapons was good, especially if they were both shields. So anyone who would have used sword and board before this will do so anyways after this due to the feel of it, rather than the lacking mechanics.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Mrakvampire wrote:
What?! This feat do nothing for shield wielders. This feat gives tonn of AC for people that previously couldn't effectively use a shield! Why is this so difficult? Sword and shield style = gets nothing.

Could it be 'difficult' because it is so obviously false?

Unhindering Shield allows a sword and buckler wielder to use the buckler arm/hand to attack (with no buckler penalty), cast spells (hello Magus builds), retrieve a potion, etc... without losing their shield bonus.

Far from "nothing".


3 people marked this as a favorite.

For clarification, as this keeps coming up.

People who didn't use a shield and now might, these are not classified as "sword and shield style" as they weren't using that style before this feat. Even with this feat you're not a sword and shield guy, you're a "whatever you were before" guy with a shield.

People you used a sword and a shield before this feat are "sword and shield style" people. These are the people that are getting no benefit. It's not helping them do what they were already doing.

151 to 200 of 388 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Pathfinder Player Companion / Is the Unhindered Shield feat Too Good? (Armor Master's Handbook) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.