Although I'm late to the party, I can officially say that people have no excuse to deny the validity of the effective size FAQ now outside of houseruling.
Thanks for the answer, PDT.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sigh.
I guess my next project is to make a Klar FAQ.
It seems we need them to specifically acknowledge it is shield spikes not armor spikes and it's already at minimum bumped up from spikes.
oo oo ooo but what about the klar from another source!
They're just going to keep doing this. Your whackamole hammerisn't fast enough to keep up.
You didn't listen the first time grasshopper...
At least there's actually some potential for ambiguity with how Klars work (ignoring the inanity that they aren't spiked shields even though they are).
Also for what it's worth on shield spikes and klars:
The armor spikes thing with spiked shield was just something we missed when collecting errata from UE (most threads/posts that noted an issue noted that the issue was with the inconsistent price, if I recall, and didn't mention the armor spikes thing).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sorry. That doesn't work. Sacred Weapon Damage replaces Weapon Damage. The Bashing Enchantment enhances the weapon damage, not the Sacred Weapon Damage. The Bashing Enchantment doesn't enhance damage as if the wielder and shield were 1 size bigger, only as if the Shield were. It is not illegal to enhance Sacred Weapon Damage with Virtual Size Increases, but the Bashing Shield Enchantment is not the way.*pats his little Klar on the head*
Don't you worry about all this talk. Your daddy's a Warpriest with Weapon Focus (Klar). Nothing they say about you will matter a thing.
Indeed.
The implication of my quip was that, since he's a Warpriest with Weapon Focus, nothing anyone says about Klar damage matters to him.
I never mentioned Bashing.
And I'll bet Mark is quietly laughing to himself after posting his "typo" in this thread. He meant to say "Klar", not "Light Shield", but I'll bet he foresaw the endless mayhem it would have (and has begun to) cause.
If the klar is an attack with shield spikes you cannot use the bashing enchant.
the bashing enchant says nothing about requiring a shield bash to function. Even if the klar had a seperate blade and shield bash attack, the bashing enchant would increase the damage of both.
If you can bash with the klar at all it starts as a d3 like any other light shield.
You seem to be making the mistake of injecting a word into the text that isn't there. The klar counts as a shield. You seem to think it reads as "the klar separately counts as a shield". But no. The klar counts as a shield, with no other limitations. Further, the klar lists what it does other than count as a shield. Namely, that it is one handed and does d6 damage. So effectively, the klar is a light shield that does d6 damage and is one handed.
Using your logic, I should be able to use the klar as a light weapon, because it counts as a light shield, which is clearly wrong.
I have to ask - considering the question was answered the argument is moot at this point. Your options here are:
- Accept the ruling (with grace if you were on the winning side - not the same thing as correct guys) and game happy
- Decide you don't like the ruling (with grace if you were on the losing side - not the same things as incorrect either) and game happy
- Either way realize that the difference in damage on a shield bash is hardly game breaking and the rules are most likely due to some obscure interaction that would be unbalancing if they allowed this - much larger changes in balance and function have happened and the game moves on
- Much like other rule changes - the important thing is to know it happened so you can have a home rule to make it how you want it - that way if someone has a book that is printed with the updated rules (that you don't like) you can point to your home rule without confusion.
Game on guys - rehashing this for another 100 posts won't change anything (or any minds) - this doesn't even effect PFS because you can't create magic items in PFS - home rule away!
You can buy specific magic items in PFS if you have enough fame for the gold price. Getting them on a sheet just means you can buy them before having enough fame. You can even upgrade generic magic items.
Alright, I think we need to take a step back for a moment, as we're reacting to something that hasn't happened yet (and probably won't for quite some time, due to Errata cycling).
To sum up what we do know has happened thus far:
-The PDT post says that Spiked Shields and Bashing Shields do not stack for damage, period, and was supposed to be reinforced by the original FAQ they cited. Not to say we told you guys so, but...
-The PDT post also says that there is an "extraneous mention of armor spikes in Ultimate Equipment's shield spikes entry," that it is "in error, and it should be reflected in the next errata."
To be honest, I don't even know what the second part refers to. I see no mention of Armor Spikes anywhere in the Shield Spikes entry. It could actually mean the reference it gives in the Spiked Shields entry, which would indeed be correct, as it references to look at Armor Spikes on Page 10 for more details, but it's hard to say that's actually what it is until they either come in and clarify, or until the Errata actually takes place. I mean, it could include the Klar (and I sincerely hope it does), but we don't know that for sure, and I won't hold my breath since they won't tackle either that or Throwing Shields for whatever reason, just like how they won't tackle things like the Dead condition not actually doing anything per RAW, the Overrun rules, what "wielding" means, etc.
And that's because I believe Paizo uses "Let the tables argue how it works" method to fix that problem. Well, that and in the case of "wielding," multiple interpretations are not only valid, but required too, otherwise you invalidate several options that should normally be doable.
*EDIT* Repetitions in Engrish is hard to avoid.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
rehashing this for another 100 posts won't change anything (or any minds)That's for sure.
I guess I need yet another shield bashing with klar thread to close the final "this way I get 2d6 right" coffin.
If you start a new thread the title needs to be:
Klar-i-FAQ-ations| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to ask - considering the question was answered the argument is moot at this point. Your options here are:
Accept the ruling (with grace if you were on the winning side - not the same thing as correct guys) and game happy
Because this particular question coming up again and again and again is a symptom of a bigger problem: the insistence on absolute raw, often in pursuit of mechanical advantage. The problem is going to keep rising up faster than the whackamole without addressing the underlying issue.
If the klar is an attack with shield spikes you cannot use the bashing enchant.
the bashing enchant says nothing about requiring a shield bash to function. Even if the klar had a seperate blade and shield bash attack, the bashing enchant would increase the damage of both.
If you can bash with the klar at all it starts as a d3 like any other light shield.
The spiked shield and bashing enchant won't stack. We already settled this.
The klar is a spiked shield, I already quoted that.
Ergo, if you put bashing on a spike shield it doesn't do anything.
The nicer answer is a longstanding question of whether you can bash with a shield with a shield spike on it or not. The nicer answer is yes, but then sense dictates that you don't get the benefit of the spike.
So effectively, the klar is a light shield that does d6 damage and is one handed.
and is a spiked shield. You have left that off too often and ignored that too often for me to think you're doing it on accident.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*sees a PDT response*
Oo! Nice to see this resolved! I mean, it shouldn't have needed further clarification *cough* gang-up ranged flank faq *cough* but at least that should solve everyth-
*keeps reading*
G%!+++mit.
I'm glad the important issue is resolved and we can all go on with our lives, enriched by this learning experience, leaving behind any other negativity or lack of comprehension to the wayside.
Thank you, PDT! The loss of Jingasa hurt, but the clarity here is very much appreciated.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But a spiked light shield does d4 damage as a light weapon. And the klar does d6 damage as a one handed weapon, so mathematically there is no evidence that the klar's damage is the result of a virtual size change from shield spikes.
And you are confused that bashing on a spiked shield does nothing. It still increases the damage by two sizes, which is one more size than is given by shield spikes. So if the klar damage is it's listed value because of a one step increase in size from shield spikes, then it would still benefit from the two size increase from bashing.
But a spiked light shield does d4 damage as a light weapon. And the klar does d6 damage as a one handed weapon, so mathematically there is no evidence that the klar's damage is the result of a virtual size change from shield spikes.
your math trumps neither the plainl obvious fact that the klar hurts more because there's a big honking blade on it nor the direct, repeatedly quoted statement that the klar is a spiked shield, OR the pdt's statement that the armored spikes bit is in error (and thus. yes. really. its a spiked shield)
There's two options
Either the klar, for some reason, started at a d4 and went up 1 size from the spike. There's no mechanical or physical reason for this.
or
The klar started at a d3 and that its a REAAALY big spike on it that took it up to a d6.
I'm done re inventing the wheel if you have to deny that it's a spiked shield, again, to make a point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not denying it's a spiked shield, though that is still a minor possibility that it isn't. I'm denying that a shield spike gives more than one effective size increase. To rule otherwise is certainly a house rule. Also a shield spike does not increase the handedness of a weapon, so the klar is obviously under the effect of more than just a shield spike. To rule otherwise would be a house rule.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*sees a PDT response*
Oo! Nice to see this resolved! I mean, it shouldn't have needed further clarification *cough* gang-up ranged flank faq *cough* but at least that should solve everyth-
*keeps reading*
G&&%+&mit.
The response reinforces and specifically applies the precedent to Shield Spikes and Bashing Shields. To that end, I appreciate the answer.
The issues with the Klar are a subject separate from what the response addresses, even if they are related in a sense. The Klar really does deserve its own FAQ thread and answer, as well as its own errata, because it really needs clarification and/or revision as to how it works.
Unfortunately, I feel like the PDT is either unsure as to how it should function, feels like it doesn't need clarification (which the player base from the forums severely disagrees on), or can't reach a consensus amongst themselves as to what the final result should be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But a spiked light shield does d4 damage as a light weapon. And the klar does d6 damage as a one handed weapon, so mathematically there is no evidence that the klar's damage is the result of a virtual size change from shield spikes.
And you are confused that bashing on a spiked shield does nothing. It still increases the damage by two sizes, which is one more size than is given by shield spikes. So if the klar damage is it's listed value because of a one step increase in size from shield spikes, then it would still benefit from the two size increase from bashing.
BNW's arguments aside, the fact that the Klar is a one-handed weapon and the Light Shield is a light weapon, could pose speculation that because it's handiness went up (by increasing the size of the object, as per the rules regarding weapons as objects), its damage dice increased as well in relation to it, supposing that it's an adjustment to its base size as a weapon.
This does mean, however, that if people are suggesting TWF with a Klar, that it is a one-handed weapon for all intents and purposes, and therefore cannot be Weapon Finessed, nor does it count as a Light weapon for reducing penalties, especially if the argument is that the Klar bashes as a One-Handed Slashing weapon, and is the only way to attack with the Klar.
**EDIT** Also don't forget that Shield Spikes function in an AMF; while not a big deal, this can be a worthwhile selling point to still apply Shield Spikes, even if you have a Bashing Shield, because there will be points where an AMF will be cast, and you're in the middle of it. As a Fighter that would plan to pick up the Penetrating Strike feats, it's definitely worthwhile, since all physical damage DR is reduced, if not negated entirely, making the necessity for dealing Bludgeoning Damage worthless.
I'm not denying it's a spiked shield, though that is still a minor possibility that it isn't.
I am not having a conversation based on epistemic nihlism. The PDT already stated that the armor spikes bit was in error. This is ridiculous to the point that it undermines what little hope remains that you're making an argument based on anything other than mechanical advantage.
You cannot accuse anyone of making "house rules! house rules! house rules!" when you're unwilling to base your arguments in what we know.
I'm denying that a shield spike gives more than one effective size increase. To rule otherwise is certainly a house rule.
It is not remotely a house rule to disagree with your very subjective determinations of whats going on in between the cracks.
Also a shield spike does not increase the handedness of a weapon, so the klar is obviously under the effect of more than just a shield spike. To rule otherwise would be a house rule.
Light shield___________ Something happens___Klar
d3 B damage, light weapon___????????????____one handed weapon d6That "something" is a big honking shield spike. It is not a "house rule" to figure that out and start any bashing attack that the DM might allow at the known value of d3 raised to a d6 for a very obvious reason (big giant spike) rather than a supposed, never seen, value of d4 with NO explanation for why it started as a d4.
If you do not have a better response to that line of logic than playing epistemic nihilist and shouting house rule, don't expect an answer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's a false dichotomy. I could just as easily argue that the going up in handedness is what increases the damage die, which is not an effective size change and so would stack with bashing. Except my interpretation doesn't require you to invent new rules for what a shield spike can do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Klars do not have Shield Spikes. They have Armor Spikes.
A traditional klar counts as a light wooden shield with armor spikes; a metal klar counts as a light steel shield with armor spikes....
You keep saying this, but it is incorrect. Only traditional Klars have the "armor spikes" wording in the Armor Descriptions section.
Klar
The traditional form of this tribal weapon is a short blade bound to the skull of a large horned lizard, but a skilled smith can craft one entirely out of metal. A traditional klar counts as a light wooden shield with armor spikes; a metal klar counts as a light steel shield with shield spikes.
And neither version has that wording in the Weapon Descriptions section.
Klar
The traditional form of this tribal weapon is a short metal blade bound to the skull of a large horned lizard, but a skilled smith can craft one entirely out of metal. A traditional klar counts as a light wooden shield with shield spikes; a metal klar counts as a light steel shield with shield spikes. The klar’s shield entry appears on page 12.
Given that the phrase "shield spikes" is used in one of the references to the traditional version and both references to the metal version, my assumption is that the single use of "armor spikes" is an error.
I base this conclusion on the wise teachings of Big Bird.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gisher: I just checked the PRD, and in both the Armor and Weapons sections, they refer exclusively to Armor Spikes. Maybe the UE Errata didn't hit the PRD yet.
**EDIT** I just downloaded and checked the UE 2nd printing Errata PDF document. The only mention of Klars is them being added to the Close Fighter Weapon Group. There is no mention of Armor Spikes, Shield Spikes, or anything else related to the Klar being changed. So I have no idea where you got that text from, but from what I can tell, it's made up, according to the PRD and UE 2nd printing Errata PDF sources, which are the official, Paizo-endorsed rules sources.