Klar-i-FAQ-ations are needed on the Klar, Spiked Shield, and more.


Rules Questions

101 to 147 of 147 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Design Team wrote:

Answered in FAQ.

FAQ wrote:

Klars: A traditional klar “counts as a light wooden shield with shield spikes”, and a metal klar “counts as a light steel shield with shield spikes”. What exactly does this mean? Particularly, a klar is a one-handed weapon that deals damage like a heavy spiked shield, and it deals slashing damage instead of piercing damage, so where do the differences end?

A klar counts as a light shield for the purpose of using it as a shield (for instance, it grants a +1 shield bonus to AC, has a –1 armor check penalty, and has a 5% arcane spell failure chance). For the purpose of using it as a weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that deals 1d6 slashing damage, but it is otherwise similar to using a spiked shield (for instance, the damage doesn’t stack with the bashing ability, you lose the shield bonus to AC when attacking with the klar unless you have Improved Shield Bash, and so on). As a side note, anywhere that lists klars as counting as shields with “armor spikes” is a typo that will be handled in the next errata.

So can you shield bash with a klar? In other words, can you use Shield Slam with a klar? And if so, do you do the weapon damage of 1d6 or the light spiked shield damage?

Thanks for ruling on this.

EDIT:
Also, can you clarify:

Bashing doesn't increase the weapon side, but would Lead Blades increase the weapon side?

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Now we just need to figure out the price of a Masterwork Klar...


Nefreet wrote:
Now we just need to figure out the price of a Masterwork Klar...

I hadn't noticed that one before. It's basically yet another question. Does the klar count as a masterwork shield or a masterwork weapon? Does it give a +1 bonus to attacks from being masterwork?


Pathfinder Design Team wrote:
Melkiador wrote:

Thanks for those klarifications. They do clear up a lot, but...

Pathfinder Design Team wrote:
...but it is otherwise similar to using a spiked shield (for instance, the damage doesn’t stack with the bashing ability...
In which way do they not stack? Does a klar with bashing deal the same damage as a small shield with bashing? Or since the klar counts as benefitting from one size increase from its shield spikes would it still deal damage as one remaining size larger with the bashing enchant?
It otherwise counts as a light shield, so it would be a light shield two size categories larger (specifically, 1d6 damage for a Medium light shield).

So with respect to performing a Shield Bash, it's not that the Bashing Enchantment does not stack with the Klar, but has no effect at all.

A Light Spiked Shield's Shield Bash would increase from 1d4 to 1d6 with the Bashing Enchantment.

But a Klar's Shield Bash only does 1d6 even with the Bashing Enchantment. It was doing 1d6 already.

So, a Klar's shield bash is already somehow benefiting from 2 size increases, so no benefit at all from Bashing?

And to clairfy, we are talking about making Shield Bash Attacks with a Klar, right? A Klar is a shield, so usually attacking with a Klar is a Shield Bash, unless you are making a Combat Maneuver with it or something, right? And a Shield Bash from a Klar, whether or not it has the Bashing Enchantment, does 1d6 Slashing.

We're not talking about some other attack from a Klar that is not a Shield Bash, if such a thing even exists.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You stabby stabby someone with the big sharp spike it's 1d6 slashing damage.

You whap someone with the Pachycephalosaurus skull it's made out of* it's 1d3 bashing. (there's precedent for whapping with the non spikey part of a spiked shield in the throwing shield)

If you put bashing on it you could put it on the Pachycephalosaurus skull, raising the damage from 1d3 to 1d6, giving you the option to deal more damage if you're fighting skellies. (still not a good buy though)

*i know they didn't bash into each other. Still thick enough to bash a goblin though.


Nefreet wrote:
Now we just need to figure out the price of a Masterwork Klar...

I will bring you alchohol to just be happy with the +450 gp answer.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

The klar's blade is a really big shield spike that increases effective size by two!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:

You stabby stabby someone with the big sharp spike it's 1d6 slashing damage.

You whap someone with the Pachycephalosaurus skull it's made out of* it's 1d3 bashing. (there's precedent for whapping with the non spikey part of a spiked shield in the throwing shield)

Except the FAQ implies you can't attack with the weapon as a light spiked shield:

"For the purpose of using it as a weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that deals 1d6 slashing damage"


Melkiador wrote:


Except the FAQ implies you can't attack with the weapon as a light spiked shield:
"For the purpose of using it as a weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that deals 1d6 slashing damage"

or just assumes that if you went through the trouble of welding a giant spike onto your dinosaur skull you're going to put the slashy end into the other person.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Melkiador wrote:


Except the FAQ implies you can't attack with the weapon as a light spiked shield:
"For the purpose of using it as a weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that deals 1d6 slashing damage"
or just assumes that if you went through the trouble of welding a giant spike onto your dinosaur skull you're going to put the slashy end into the other person.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Just like a normal shield, you'd need to add +150 gp for MW Klar for AC and another +300 gp for MW Klar for weapon.


BigNorseWolf wrote:

You stabby stabby someone with the big sharp spike it's 1d6 slashing damage.

You whap someone with the Pachycephalosaurus skull it's made out of* it's 1d3 bashing. (there's precedent for whapping with the non spikey part of a spiked shield in the throwing shield)

If you put bashing on it you could put it on the Pachycephalosaurus skull, raising the damage from 1d3 to 1d6, giving you the option to deal more damage if you're fighting skellies. (still not a good buy though)

*i know they didn't bash into each other. Still thick enough to bash a goblin though.

So your guess is that they do indeed intend that there is indeed such a thing as a non-Bashing, Slashing attack with a Klar. That the 1d6 Slashing attack with the Klar is not a Shield Bash?

That's unprecedented, and the FAQ doesn't say that. The FAQ sort of contradicts that. If the Klar's Slashing Blade were somehow not a Shield Bash, that 1d6 Slashing Blade would not be a part of whatever those Shield Spikes do; there would be no Virtual Size Increase; and the Non Bashing Slashing Blade would still benefit fully from the Bashing Enchantment: 2d6. Remember that the Bashing Enchantment increases all the damage that a Shield does, not just the Bashing Damage.

Anyway, the FAQ and Official Rules Posts say this is not the case.

Further, it sounds like you are suggesting that you can make a Shield Bash Attack with a Klar without the 1d6 Slashing Blade, treating it as a light shield that does either 1d3 Blunt or 1d4 Piercing damage: I'm not sure which you mean, because I also don't see anywhere in the rules, or the recent Official Rules Posts that support that.

Melkiador wrote:

Except the FAQ implies you can't attack with the weapon as a light spiked shield:

"For the purpose of using it as a weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that deals 1d6 slashing damage"

I don't think that implies that. After all, a Heavy, Spiked Shield is a 1 handed weapon that deals 1d6 damage. The Klar is still a Shield, and Shields are still weapons, with the exception of the Buckler, which is specified as not being usable as a weapon. And using a Shield as a weapon has pretty much always been a Shield Bash. If this is not the case with the Klar, that exception needs to be specified.

I wrote:
So, a Klar's shield bash is already somehow benefiting from 2 size increases, so no benefit at all from Bashing?
KingOfAnything wrote:
The klar's blade is a really big shield spike that increases effective size by two!

That seems like the sensible interpretation.


Pathfinder Design Team wrote:

Answered in FAQ.

FAQ wrote:

Klars: A traditional klar “counts as a light wooden shield with shield spikes”, and a metal klar “counts as a light steel shield with shield spikes”. What exactly does this mean? Particularly, a klar is a one-handed weapon that deals damage like a heavy spiked shield, and it deals slashing damage instead of piercing damage, so where do the differences end?

A klar counts as a light shield for the purpose of using it as a shield (for instance, it grants a +1 shield bonus to AC, has a –1 armor check penalty, and has a 5% arcane spell failure chance). For the purpose of using it as a weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that deals 1d6 slashing damage, but it is otherwise similar to using a spiked shield (for instance, the damage doesn’t stack with the bashing ability, you lose the shield bonus to AC when attacking with the klar unless you have Improved Shield Bash, and so on). As a side note, anywhere that lists klars as counting as shields with “armor spikes” is a typo that will be handled in the next errata.

Thank you SO much for providing an official answer to this. This was something that needed to be addressed for so long, I'm glad all the headache and arguing is going to be over with.

If only I could favorite this post more than once...


BigNorseWolf wrote:
You whap someone with the Pachycephalosaurus skull it's made out of* it's 1d3 bashing. (there's precedent for whapping with the non spikey part of a spiked shield in the throwing shield)

I don't think I gave this due diligence earlier. I agree that such a thing could exist, but I think the Throwing Shield is the exception that proves the rule. Throwing Shields are specifically named and thoroughly defined. We know just what putting the Throwing feature on a shield does.

A non-Bashing, Slashing attack of the Klar has nothing like the text of rules the Throwing Shield has. The Bashing, non-Slashing attack of the Klar doesn't either. For those exceptions to the fact that a Klar is a Shield and attacking with a Shield is called Shield Bashing, those exceptions need to be specifically made the way Throwing is.

And they haven't been, afaIk.


Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Pathfinder Design Team wrote:

Answered in FAQ.

FAQ wrote:

Klars: A traditional klar “counts as a light wooden shield with shield spikes”, and a metal klar “counts as a light steel shield with shield spikes”. What exactly does this mean? Particularly, a klar is a one-handed weapon that deals damage like a heavy spiked shield, and it deals slashing damage instead of piercing damage, so where do the differences end?

A klar counts as a light shield for the purpose of using it as a shield (for instance, it grants a +1 shield bonus to AC, has a –1 armor check penalty, and has a 5% arcane spell failure chance). For the purpose of using it as a weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that deals 1d6 slashing damage, but it is otherwise similar to using a spiked shield (for instance, the damage doesn’t stack with the bashing ability, you lose the shield bonus to AC when attacking with the klar unless you have Improved Shield Bash, and so on). As a side note, anywhere that lists klars as counting as shields with “armor spikes” is a typo that will be handled in the next errata.

Thank you SO much for providing an official answer to this. This was something that needed to be addressed for so long, I'm glad all the headache and arguing is going to be over with.

If only I could favorite this post more than once...

I appreciate the FAQ as well. The FAQ is an example of good customer service.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber
James Risner wrote:
Just like a normal shield, you'd need to add +150 gp for MW Klar for AC and another +300 gp for MW Klar for weapon.

I never knew that was a thing for shields in general.

I've always gone off of the idea that creating a masterwork shield (klar included) costs +150gp, lowers the ACP by 1, and grants no enhancement bonus on attacks.

It's then a "masterwork shield", and can be enchanted as either a weapon or a shield.

Perhaps this should be the next FAQ topic =\

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

*grumble* FAQing Klars... *grumble* *grumble*


James Risner wrote:
Just like a normal shield, you'd need to add +150 gp for MW Klar for AC and another +300 gp for MW Klar for weapon.

You can't make a Masterwork Shield that improves your to-hit. From the PRD:

Masterwork Weapons wrote:
Even though some types of armor and shields can be used as weapons, you can't create a masterwork version of such an item that confers an enhancement bonus on attack rolls. Instead, masterwork armor and shields have lessened armor check penalties.

Nor can you pay extra to apply both benefits of Masterwork quality. You can only pay 150 gold to reduce the ACP of the shield.

This does point out, however, that if your shield provides a -1 ACP because of its Masterwork quality, it still constitutes being a Masterwork weapon (since the ACP reduction is applied in place of the increased to-hit), and therefore can be enhanced as such (that is, without the rules specifically saying so, of course).

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Darsol, that passage says the opposite.

It's telling you that masterwork shield with the 150 gp doesn't work like a masterwork weapon. Which was my whole point. If you spend the 150, you don't get the +1 to hit. You would still need to pay 300 more to get the +1 to hit.


No, it's not. Didn't you see the bolded part that says "You can't create a masterwork version of such an item that confers an enhancement bonus on attack rolls"?

The RAW from the PRD specifically states that you can't ever create armor or shields that grant +1 to hit, so you stating that you "need to pay 300 more to get the +1 to hit" is asking for someone to learn and cast a 10th level spell.

In both cases, the result is simple: You can't do it. It's impossible. To do so otherwise would be considered houseruling.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Which says "you can't spend 150 gp and get a cheap +1 to attack"


I have to agree with Darksol "can't create a masterwork version of such an item that confers an enhancement bonus to attack rolls" means just that. A masterwork shield never gives +1 to attack.


James Risner wrote:
Which says "you can't spend 150 gp and get a cheap +1 to attack"

You can't spend 300 gp to get a +1 to attack either. And the PRD doesn't say what you just said. Plus, the rules never let you do either of those things anyway.

It says that "Instead, masterwork armor and shields have lessened armor check penalties." This means that, instead of these masterwork armor and shields being used as weapons getting a +1 to their to-hit as other masterwork weapons would, you get ACP reduction.

So by the rules, it's technically still a masterwork weapon, because the ACP reduction is applied instead of the +1 to-hit you normally get for masterwork weapons.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
it's technically still a masterwork weapon, because the ACP reduction is applied instead of the +1 to-hit you normally get for masterwork weapons.

+1 100%

You are point at "you can't benefit from the +1 by paying 150 gp" rules.

Look at the "pay 300 gp" part:

Quote:
An enhancement bonus on a shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but the shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.

If you make the shield a weapon, by paying 300 gp and the 2,000 gp for a +1 enhancement bonus. It becomes a weapon in its own right.


James Risner wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
it's technically still a masterwork weapon, because the ACP reduction is applied instead of the +1 to-hit you normally get for masterwork weapons.

+1 100%

You are point at "you can't benefit from the +1 by paying 150 gp" rules.

Look at the "pay 300 gp" part:

Quote:
An enhancement bonus on a shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but the shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.
If you make the shield a weapon, by paying 300 gp and the 2,000 gp for a +1 enhancement bonus. It becomes a weapon in its own right.

You can't pay 300 gold to grant a +1 via masterwork, because the shield is already masterwork. I've said this three times now, and the PRD says this too.

The ability to make it a magic weapon is already allowed because the shield is, according to the rules, already a masterwork weapon by having the 150 gold spent to apply the ACP reduction.


Looks like we need another faq about klars.... Lol


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

No, what we need is a FAQ about enhancing shields as weapons.

For the record, I agree with Darksol: +150 gp nets you a masterwork shield. Masterwork shields have a reduced ACP, and no enhancement bonus to hit. Since it is masterwork, it can be made +1 as a weapon for 2,000 gp.


Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
No, it's not. Didn't you see the bolded part that says "You can't create a masterwork version of such an item that confers an enhancement bonus on attack rolls"?

Yes, and immediately noticed the contradiction with the idea that they can be enchanted as magical weapons in their own right, and that requires a masterwork version.


scott wilhelm wrote:
your guess is that they do indeed intend that there is indeed such a thing as a non-Bashing, Slashing attack with a Klar. That the 1d6 Slashing attack with the Klar is not a Shield Bash?

no. I have no idea where you're getting that.

Attacking with the sharp slashy thing is a shield bash attack (because the spiked shield section specifically calls it out)

Attacking with the blunt bashy part of it (if that's still legal after a a shield spike has been added, thats been debated longer than some of my players have been alive) is also a shield bash attack, but wouldn't get the benefit of the sharp slashy thing. Even though it only exists in your head, A klar is not a platonic object with certain properties inherent in it's nature. It has those properties for a reason. It deals more damage than normal because of the big old spike, if you're not using the big old spike it doesn't do the extra damage.


Scott Wilhelm wrote:
your guess is that they do indeed intend that there is indeed such a thing as a non-Bashing, Slashing attack with a Klar. That the 1d6 Slashing attack with the Klar is not a Shield Bash?
BigNorseWolf wrote:
no. I have no idea where you're getting that.

That's the impression I got. I got that impression in error. I apologize.

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Attacking with the sharp slashy thing is a shield bash attack (because the spiked shield section specifically calls it out)

I agree.

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Attacking with the blunt bashy part of it (if that's still legal after a a shield spike has been added, thats been debated longer than some of my players have been alive) is also a shield bash attack, but wouldn't get the benefit of the sharp slashy thing.

So, now you are saying that the Klar allows you can make 2 different kinds of Shield Bash Attacks: 1 for 1d6 Slashing, and 1 for 1d4 Piercing?

I have no idea where you're getting that. The Damage given for the Klar is not 1d6/1d4; S or P. It's just 1d6 Slashing.

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Even though it only exists in your head,

Well, all our heads, but okay.*

BigNorseWolf wrote:
A klar is not a platonic object with certain properties inherent in it's nature. It has those properties for a reason. It deals more damage than normal because of the big old spike, if you're not using the big old spike it doesn't do the extra damage.

Interesting, but I think the only relevant philosophical evidence and laws of physics for describing the Klar are the Pathfinder Rules as Written.

*Unless of course, all of you only exist in my head, too!


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
No, it's not. Didn't you see the bolded part that says "You can't create a masterwork version of such an item that confers an enhancement bonus on attack rolls"?

Yes, and immediately noticed the contradiction with the idea that they can be enchanted as magical weapons in their own right, and that requires a masterwork version.

Which it already is.

You also glossed over the text that says the ACP reduction is applied instead of the +1 to-hit. That's because the rules specifically disallow armor and shields having a +1 to-hit. This means that for the intents and purposes of constituting a Masterwork Weapon, if an armor or shield that can be used as a weapon and has reduced ACP in such a manner instead of the +1 to-hit, it is still, in fact, a Masterwork Weapon.


Scott Wilhelm wrote:
So, now you are saying that the Klar allows you can make 2 different kinds of Shield Bash Attacks: 1 for 1d6 Slashing, and 1 for 1d4 Piercing?

1d6 slashing or 1d3 Bludgeoning, and I'm not saying it now I've been saying it for three threads.

--->with the Pachycephalosaurus skull it's made out of* it's 1d3 bashing.
---> blunt bashy

The d3 is backed up by the second design team post stating its a d3 for a light shield if you were to put the bashing enchantment on it.

It's use as a bludgeoning weapon is not, but as it's not mechanically overpowered ,seems physically possible, I'd be fine with it. I wouldn't build a character around it, but wouldn't tell someone know they can't do it either.

Quote:
Interesting, but I think the only relevant philosophical evidence and laws of physics for describing the Klar are the Pathfinder Rules as Written.

the descriptions of things are part of the rules, and provide a lot of much needed insight when (and i do mean when, not if) your players do something that isn't explicitly listed.


Darksol the Painbringer wrote:


You also glossed over the text

It was not glossed over.

masterwork weapon
masterwork armor
Masterwork tool

Three uses of masterwork that mean different things.

Quote:
that says the ACP reduction is applied instead of the +1 to-hit.

By this logic, I could enchant a masterwork set of thieves tools as masterwork weapons because they are masterwork. Shields may in fact be intended to work that way, I'm pretty sure a masterwork drinking cup is not. I think it would be odd if a masterwork shield was the cheapest masterwork weapon in the game.

As the difference between the two is only 300 fake units of currency (faker even than real units of currency) I would just pay the extra gold.


You guys are missing the gold here...

Klar's can have vorpal or keen edge.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:


You also glossed over the text

It was not glossed over.

masterwork weapon
masterwork armor
Masterwork tool

Three uses of masterwork that mean different things.

Quote:
that says the ACP reduction is applied instead of the +1 to-hit.

By this logic, I could enchant a masterwork set of thieves tools as masterwork weapons because they are masterwork. Shields may in fact be intended to work that way, I'm pretty sure a masterwork drinking cup is not. I think it would be odd if a masterwork shield was the cheapest masterwork weapon in the game.

As the difference between the two is only 300 fake units of currency (faker even than real units of currency) I would just pay the extra gold.

Except you can't. You're pulling the same mistake James Risner is by saying you can pay 300 gold to give the shield a +1 to hit. The rules specifically say that you can't do that.

This is the 4th time I've said this, and it hasn't changed on the PRD in the short time we've discussed this.

And yes, you did gloss over it, because you would realize that the "instead" clause only applies to Armor and Shields (as they are what is being called out), because you are paying for the ACP reduction to constitute being Masterwork [i]instead[/b] of the +1 to-hit that other Masterwork Weapons usually possess. This is specific to Armor and Shields in contrast to the general rules regarding Masterwork Weapons.

Masterwork items like cups, tools, etc. wouldn't apply, because they aren't a type of Armor or Shields that can be made Masterwork, which the "instead" clause applies to.


Ckorik wrote:

You guys are missing the gold here...

Klar's can have vorpal or keen edge.

Vorpal isn't really anything special unless you're fighting the Jabbawock, and isn't worth the price tag. Even if you have a 1 in 5 chance of decapitating an enemy, you would basically do the same thing with a X4 critical multiplier weapon, being a competent martial and everything, and the enemy wouldn't require a head to do so.

Also, Keen isn't particularly effective for it, since the critical multiplier for the Klar remains a 20/X2, even after the FAQ. So making it 19-20/X2, while still helpful, isn't particularly gamebreaking, and really only makes up for the fact that you can't bump its damage to 2D6 anymore via Bashing. It would be more prudent to apply it to a X4 weapon, like the Scythe, than it would the Klar, ironically enough.

The only real benefit to a Klar at this point is that you're saving more money in enhancements and flat modifiers, and that it's a shield you can both use defensively and offensively, quite well, without having to spend more than say, an Improved Shield Bash feat. That isn't to say it's bad; it's actually the best versatile Shield choice in the game, since it's a Light Shield defensively (letting you cast spells or otherwise maintain free hands via Sword and Board), and a one-handed weapon offensively (which means you can two-hand for 1.5x Strength).


4 people marked this as a favorite.

It was, again. Not glossed over. Accept the fact that people can disagree with you without being lazy, incompetent, or biased and deal with what's being said rather than just insulting people.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
It was, again. Not glossed over. Accept the fact that people can disagree with you without being lazy, incompetent, or biased and deal with what's being said rather than just insulting people.

Insulting people is bad. You shouldn't do it. No one should play in Pathfinder Society if it is a place where people's ideas are stomped on, and they can't rely on the rules to do what they say.

Definitely, you should keep a civil tone.


Scott Wilhelm wrote:


No one should play in Pathfinder Society if it is a place where people's ideas are stomped on, and they can't rely on the rules to do what they say.

You would definitely see it as your ideas being "stomped on" and the rules not doing as they say on the many occasions where a DM would look over and say "yeah, thats NOT how that works." But as with rules interpretations, just because that's how you see it doesn't mean that that's how it is.

The society as a whole, would see it as the DM's role to ensure a fair meaning of the rules, provide a check on blatant rules lawyering, and provide a fun time for everyone at the table, not just the rules lawyer dangling participles until they cry out for mercy in the pursuit of a mechanical advantage. This is a necessary thing for any game

By now you have to have noticed a trend where the people following the rules to not "do what they say" and i would add -do what they mean instead- tend to be right far more often than not.

If you want people that match your play style you will have to find a more persnickity, raw happy den of scum and villiany than PFS's persnickity raw happy den of scum and villiany.

Good Luck. You'll need it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
It was, again. Not glossed over. Accept the fact that people can disagree with you without being lazy, incompetent, or biased and deal with what's being said rather than just insulting people.

I am dealing with what's being said.

You said:

BigNorseWolf wrote:
As the difference between the two is only 300 fake units of currency (faker even than real units of currency) I would just pay the extra gold.

From this claim, I presumed you were talking about the difference between a Masterwork Shield with reduced ACP, and a Masterwork Shield with increased to-hit. If that wasn't it, then I apologize. But if it is, then I pointed to the rule that said you can't pay for the extra 300 gold to get the +1 to hit for Armor and Shields, that you have to pay the extra 150 gold to reduce the ACP instead. Four times, yes, but not all of them were towards you (though you made the same argument that James Risner made), and that's because my stance hasn't changed, since no new evidence has come to light that I haven't refuted.

If you see that as an insult, then I apologize, because that's not the intent behind these statements. I'm always about making sure that I'm getting my point across clearly and concisely. Unfortunately, that even includes being a little blunt about it, because the Pathfinder rules are confusing, difficult to explain, and at points, quite contradictive to their intent.

At any rate, it is clear that the original question to this thread has been answered, and this debate we're currently having is irrelevant to the answer already provided. If someone else wants to make a thread about how Shields become Magic Weapons when they can't be created as (the general definition of) Masterwork Weapons, then we can continue the discussion there. Until then, it's just pointless, stress-inducing, back-and-forth pock shots, something that helps nobody, and as of right now, serves no purpose other than to cause trouble.


Darksol the painbringer wrote:
If you see that as an insult, then I apologize, because that's not the intent behind these statements. I'm always about making sure that I'm getting my point across clearly and concisely. Unfortunately, that even includes being a little blunt about it, because the Pathfinder rules are confusing, difficult to explain, and at points, quite contradictive to their intent.

That is not the insult.

Saying that it was glossed over is. especially when, by virtue of saying there's a bit of a contradiction there, we acknowledge that what you said is true and accurate and logical it just doesn't agree with some of the other true, accurate, and logical stuff elsewhere. It is entirely possible for the rules to contradict themselves

Having an argument, even a good one, for a position doesn't mean that there's not a good or even better argument for a different position.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
since no new evidence has come to light that I haven't refuted.

You issue, is the evident has been refuted just not to your satisfaction. Until you show a developer comment agreeing with you or something that explicitly says you can make a +1 shield also a +1 weapon for shield cost + 150 + 1000 + 2000, I'll continue to require (and pay for my characters) the extra 300 gp. It's an expense that makes me guaranteed to be RAW legal at all tables:

  • At your table, you will kibitz to me that I have 300 gp extra in my pocket.
  • At other tables, I'll have spent the money required.

I get you are fighting the valiant fight to make sure we don't spend 300 gp we are not required. I just think you should stick to your guns so hard after you get a FAQ or developer post to back up your guns.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

BigNorseWolf wrote:
It is entirely possible for the rules to contradict themselves

Actually, the point of the line he is using is that you can't pay 150 gp and "say" you get the +1 to attack because it is now "masterwork" and attacking with a "masterwork" weapon (in this case the ACP reduced masterwork shield) should gain the +1 to attack.

They go out of the way to indicate that isn't how it works.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the issue come in if someone spends the 300 gp to get a +1 to hit from their Masterwork Shield. That's what Darksol seems to be saying is explicitly not allowed. And from the rules he's quoted, I'm inclined to agree. But I can see where the table variation comes in, as "can also be enchanted as a weapon" could be read to include the masterwork part of a weapon as well.

So anyway, I don't think it's the 300 gold Darksol cares about. It's that the rules seem to say that you can't ever get the +1 to hit from making your shield masterwork.

Are there no examples of shields enchanted as weapons in Ultimate Equipment or elsewhere with a price that could be reverse engineered?

EDIT: I did a quick glance through the Specific Magic Shields, and I didn't see an obvious one. Sometimes I really wish Paizo included more examples in their books for rules like this.


James Risner wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
It is entirely possible for the rules to contradict themselves

Actually, the point of the line he is using is that you can't pay 150 gp and "say" you get the +1 to attack because it is now "masterwork" and attacking with a "masterwork" weapon (in this case the ACP reduced masterwork shield) should gain the +1 to attack.

They go out of the way to indicate that isn't how it works.

Right, but that leaves us with some questions.

How do you wind up with a +1 (as a weapon) shield? I've seen a lot of different answers to that over the years

1) you can enchant it as a weapon anyway, making it the cheapest +1 weapon around by 150 gold

2) you pay an extra 300 gp to have it be a masterwork weapon as well as a masterwork shield.

3) You CAN"T have a masterwork weapon shield, you have to add a shield spike and then enchant that. (i think that ones the most directly contradicted)

For a klar, since the spike is treated like a shield spike, you'd want to make THAT masterwork at +300 gold and then probably the shield masterwork at +150.

Sovereign Court

I just bought a mithal klar, which is automatically masterwork. I'm not claiming a to-hit bonus until I get my Shield Mastery or have the sharp bit weapon-enchanted though.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

BigNorseWolf wrote:

1) you can enchant it as a weapon anyway, making it the cheapest +1 weapon around by 150 gold

2) you pay an extra 300 gp to have it be a masterwork weapon as well as a masterwork shield.
3) You CAN"T have a masterwork weapon shield, you have to add a shield spike and then enchant that.

+1

That is the entirety of the table variance interpretations of the rules, and without developer comment or example items in the rules there is no way to know which is correct.

101 to 147 of 147 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / Klar-i-FAQ-ations are needed on the Klar, Spiked Shield, and more. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.