I'm happy to finally have this cleared up.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
OO oo ooo but what about klars! thats totally different right!
*will get the newspawper and thwap themselves in the head for that one...*
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
No FAQ Required: As per this FAQ on effective size increases, two effective size increases do not stack. Shield spikes and bashing both grant effective size increases, so they do not stack. The extraneous mention of armor spikes in Ultimate Equipment’s shield spikes entry is in error, and it should be reflected in the next errata.
Woot!
That's nice, but it would have been better if they could have cleared up the klar while they were at it.
Which part? The comment on armor spikes probably applies to Klar also. I guess the question is whether or not it's a bashing target?
A bit of both.
A) Is the klar's damage its current value because it is being modified by virtual shield spikes?B) Is an attack with a klar a shield bash?
The klar can definitely be enchanted with bashing and it would effect the damage either way. It's just unclear how much the damage increases.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
They answered it in march 2015.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They answered it in march 2015.
Only indirectly, with some doubt of intent remaining, and then unanswered it with the new printing of Ultimare Equipment. But now we have a definitive answer that spiked shield damage is an effective size change. Now no doubt should remain.
The klar can definitely be enchanted with bashingExpect table variation on that.
Why? The klar counts as a light shield and bashing can be put on a light shield. There shouldn't be any question that the enchant can go on it. I'm just not sure what the enchant does once it's on there.
The klar can definitely be enchanted with bashingExpect table variation on that.
I would expect almost no variation from oh hell no or enjoy your choice of d6 slashing or d6 bashing.
|
The logic tree goes like this:
Truth #1: Bashing can only be placed on things named "Light Shield" (and things named "Heavy Shield", but that's irrelevant to this logic tree).
Truth #2: Bashing increases the damage of things named "Light Shield" by two steps.
Truth #3: things named "Light Shield" deal 1d3 bludgeoning damage.
Truth #4: 1d3 increased two steps becomes 1d6.
Question: Is the Klar a thing named "Light Shield"?
- No, a Klar is a thing named "Klar".
- - Bashing cannot be placed on things named "Klar".
- No, a Klar counts as a thing named "Light Spiked Shield".
- - Bashing cannot be placed on things named "Light Spiked Shield".
- Yes, a Klar counts as a thing named "Light Shield"
- - Bashing can be placed on things named "Light Shield".
- - - Things named "Light Shield" deal 1d3 bludgeoning damage.
- - - - 1d3 increased two steps becomes 1d6.
"Expect" is a vague term though. You can expect table variation on almost anything. The question is how common will people rule one way over the other. And the dev post in this thread suggests that the klar is probably a spiked light shield, and the "armor spike" language is likely an error and should be shield spikes. It'd be good if we could get an actual response on that.
I'd also be curious what hero labs has to say on this, but I don't have that. What do they think the rules for a bashing klar are?
Maybe it would be better if we just asked what does this text mean and what does it do:
"A traditional klar counts as a light wooden shield with armor spikes; a metal klar counts as a light steel shield with armor spikes."
That text is there for some reason. But some people seem to want to read it as if it's meaningless. And if there are two interpretations of a rule and one has meaning and the other doesn't. Then the one that has meaning seems like the only sensible ruling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That logic tree depends on inventing a whole new way of attacking with a shield that is not a shield bash, and that is just not supported in the rules.
The "invented" way of attacking with a klar is to use that giant blade on the end of it to slash people with. It does more damage than a regular shield and a different type of damage than a regular shield because it's got a big honking blade on it. If you are not using that big honking blade, you are not getting more damage. This is a level of obviousness and intuitiveness that the rules assume you read with. Deliberately ignoring that and worse, insisting that anyone using that is making stuff up, has lead to the wrong answer and is going to keep leading to the wrong answer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Only indirectly
It was very direct. One thing with as if language. Both things had as if language, they don't stack.
with some doubt of intent remaining
There was not.
. Now no doubt should remain.
And now, despite my efforts to parody it, you are in fact arguing that a klar is something different and this ruling doesn't apply. So yes, doubt remains. "Doubt" will always remain when people want to get a mechanical advantage.
I can not consider the "doubt" genuine when the grounds for questioning it are as flimsy and nonsensical as what I'm seeing here. There is just absolutely no substance to it, at all. I don't know how else to put that.
Please look at how you got the wrong answer and try to consider the possibility that it wasn't an accident, and consider what you can do differently now.
They answered it in march 2015.
They did, and that official rules post got buried in the morass of these message boards, so that very few people have been able to find it.
And people that knew about it linked to it.
Again
And again
And again
...and it kept getting ignored. Not because it was hard to find, but because that wasn't the answer people wanted.
I'm saying I don't know what the klar does. I could accept a bashing klar doing anywhere from 1d8 to 2d6 damage. The klar certainly isn't attached to any language that implies it is naturally under the effect of a size change. But that could also easily be the intention.
And brining mechanical advantage into this is just being silly. A magically enhanced weapon that still only does 2d6 base damage with a x2 critical is never going to win the DPR olympics.
The klar certainly isn't attached to any language that implies it is naturally under the effect of a size change.
This is objectively wrong. The klar is described as a light shield swith a shield spike on it. That links it to a virtual size increase.
You have had this pointed out to you.You have to stop saying this just because it agrees with your point.
The most common answers on a bashing Klar will be d6 slash or bludgeon or hell no.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the Klar is very clearly a spiked shield. Ergo virtual size increase.
There is some ambiguity, but I don't see a way to justify 2d6 damage.
Either the Klar's blade attack is the shield bash, in which case it's being modified by shield spikes and a bashing klar would do 1d8 damage since two size increases don't stack.
Or the Klar's blade is separate and you can also shield bash, in which case the blade isn't eligible for bashing in the first place, so a Bashing Klar would do 1d6 piercing or 1d6 slashing.. as two unique weapons taped together.
The latest official description of the Klar says it does not have Shield Spikes.
You keep saying this, but you know it's wrong. The developers have admitted that it was an errata oversight and books published around the same time as UE do properly refer to it as a spiked shield.
Intuitively, that is what leads to wrong answers.
Then why is the sola raw interpretation/ method so consistently wrong?
What it intuitive is that you don't invent new ways of attacking with a shield that exist nowhere else, never existed before, and is not specifically mentioned anywhere in the rules.
It is specifically mentioned multiple times in the klars description that there is a big honking blade on it. It does slashing damage. The authors assumed that we could figure out the rest. Most of us can.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The klar certainly isn't attached to any language that implies it is naturally under the effect of a size change.This is objectively wrong. The klar is described as a light shield swith a shield spike on it. That links it to a virtual size increase.
You have had this pointed out to you.
You have to stop saying this just because it agrees with your point.The most common answers on a bashing Klar will be d6 slash or bludgeon or hell no.
First, it says armor spikes instead of shield spikes, which needs a dev clarification right there by itself. Second, assuming it's clarified to be shield spikes, the klar's damage is listed as 1d6, and if that damage is being modified by shield spikes it would give it a "base" of 1d4, because shield spikes only increase damage by one size increment, so after increasing that base twice for bashing, you'd be at 1d8.
First, it says armor spikes instead of shield spikes, which needs a dev clarification tight there by itself.
Obvious mistake. And it already got it.
Second, assuming it's clarified to be shield spikes, the klar's damage is listed as 1d6, and if that damage is being modified by shield spikes it would give it a base of d4, since shield spikes only increase damage by one size increment, so after increasing that base twice for bashing, you'd be at 1d8.
A klar is a light shield. Light shields start at d3. The slashy spike is simply more effective than the regular one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe they trust us to make the logic leap of
The extraneous mention of armor spikes in Ultimate Equipment’s shield spikes entry is in error, and it should be reflected in the next errata.
Maybe I expect them to address and clarify their mistakes that were recently reprinted despite the fact that they were obviously looking right at these items and these issues with those items have been long known.
Maybe I expect them to address and clarify their mistakes that were recently reprinted despite the fact that they were obviously looking right at these items and these issues with those items have been long known.
The response to an obvious mistake that bothers you is "hey, you mean x why don't you change this to mean it" not "i'm going to pretend that you absolutely meant x, and insist that everyone plays as if it was x "
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The response to an obvious mistake that bothers you is "hey, you mean x why don't you change this to mean it" not "i'm going to pretend that you absolutely meant x, and insist that everyone plays as if it was x "
Maybe I expect them to address and clarify their mistakes that were recently reprinted despite the fact that they were obviously looking right at these items and these issues with those items have been long known.
Actually at what point did I say any of those things? Quote me. You seem to think I have an agenda here other than getting this straightened out. You are mistaken.