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


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 147 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

65 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 6 people marked this as a favorite.

Klar is a light shield with shield spikes, which is a virtual size increase and doesn't stack with bashing
Which of these are true: A Bashing Klar deals 1d6 slashing or piercing; 1d6 slashing or 1d8 piercing?; *or* 1d6 slashing or 2d6 piercing?

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 armor spikes; a metal klar counts as a light steel shield with armor spikes.

Let's try the third FAQ of Spiked Bashing FAQ, this time with the Klar.

It uses the same flawed "armor spikes" language and doesn't describe how the 1d6 is calculated, so both adding spikes and adding bashing are independently recommended to increase it's damage beyond 1d6.

Regardless of the side of this issue you stand, please don't debate it here. Just FAQ and tell your friends to FAQ.

Klar derailing the recent Spiked Shield Re-FAQ
Magically enhancing a Klar with Bashing and Spikeds for 3d6 damage!
Klar is a innate Bashing property so won't stack with spiked or bashing
Klar is not a Spiked Shield so you can add bashing or spikes to it
Klar can be affected by the Bashing property to deal 2D6 Slashing damage
Klar with the Bashing Enchantment does as much damage as an Earthbreaker
Shields with Armor spikes make no sense
Stay with your bashing klar, it's more damage
27 questions about the Klar, it could be a whole blog post answering them all
Focus on Bashing Klar!
They must have said armor spikes to make it useless for Bashing right?
The Klar practically needs it own FAQ
Klar is a 1d6 slashing attached to a 1d3 shield bash?
Is klar just a slashing 1d6 shield bash?
Klash with bashing is 2d6
Klar is two weapons in one, a blade and a shield
Klar with bashing...
I'm getting bored typing these ... I just skipped over 20 more threads back to Jan 2014. Suffice it to say this comes up often and is often an issue that the two sides don't agree.

While we are on the subject, I think most of this could have been solved by forum posts by PDT members. We are currently unable to do so primarily because of this PDT member post invalidating any wisdom that could be used. Any chance on getting a change of this "posts are all unofficial" policy? It would do wonders.

Also, thanks to Melkiador for the title pun on clarification!


3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 5 people marked this as a favorite.

Dear dev team.

If you mark this no FAQ required it will be asked again. Your policy on 'no FAQ required' needs to change from 'it's obvious to us' to something along the lines of 'if we keep getting this question our rule language sucks - simply it at the least'.

Thank you and FAQ'd.


The Klar has bigger and more notable problems than what the OP mentions.

For starters, is the Klar's weapon entry its Shield Bash damage, or does the Klar have its own entry because its description of "a short metal blade bound to the skull of a large horned lizard," makes it become its own sort of weapon (apart from it being a shield, of course)?

It also failed to mention as to whether the shield actually means Armor Spikes or Shield Spikes. If it means Armor Spikes, then you actually have 3 methods of attack, which is a Shield Bash, an Armor Spikes attack, or its own attack from said "short metal blade". Are all of these methods of attack valid? If not, then which ones are?

It's not so much that I'm trying to undermine the OP's points, but it really only addresses one or two things out of several that actually require fixing to get a consistent and coherent item, because it's all over the place; there are tables which rules all 3 attacks apply, and others rule only one or two. There are tables which rule that the Klar's entry is for its Shield Bash damage, and others state that it's a damage entry separate from what it's damage as a Shield Bash actually is, and even others that state the damage type should be changed to reflect that it's a spiked shield, and not a bladed one.

And in a game such as PFS, where consistency and reliability should be enforced (and supported), that's not acceptable. While I understand there is Table Variance in certain areas (and there should be), something as basic as what a weapon actually does for the user shouldn't be nearly as radical as I've seen and described.

I did hit the FAQ button, but I sincerely hope the PDT considers changes on a larger scale besides "Is there Armor Spikes or Shield Spikes on a Klar?"


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I don't think this will endear us to PDT.

Still FAQing it, but it's almost certain to just annoy them.


James Risner wrote:

Klar is a light shield with shield spikes, which is a virtual size increase and doesn't stack with bashing

Which of these are true: A Bashing Klar deals 1d6 slashing or piercing; 1d6 slashing or 1d8 piercing?; *or* 1d6 slashing or 2d6 piercing?

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 armor spikes; a metal klar counts as a light steel shield with armor spikes.

Let's try the third FAQ of Spiked Bashing FAQ, this time with the Klar.

It uses the same flawed "armor spikes" language and doesn't describe how the 1d6 is calculated, so both adding spikes and adding bashing are independently recommended to increase it's damage beyond 1d6.

If you check the pdf for the 2nd printing of Ultimate Equipment you will see that the "armor spikes" phrasing was removed from three of the four places where it occurred.

UE 2nd printing: Armor Descriptions, page 12 wrote:

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.
UE 2nd printing: Weapon Descriptions, page 31 wrote:

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.

I'm going to assume that the one remaining reference was left by mistake.

I understand that you don't want to debate this here, but I think this might change the nature of your question.


I'm going to try to pull an occam's razor here and go "counts-as" =/= "is".


Quote:
Which of these are true: A Bashing Klar deals 1d6 slashing or piercing; 1d6 slashing or 1d8 piercing?; *or* 1d6 slashing or 2d6 piercing?

1d8 slashing should also be on the list, because there's the potential that the Klar's attack is its shield bash and it never has the ability to do piercing damage, reverse engineering off the effective size increase from the spike gives you d4 so bashing gives you d8.

In fact I think the FAQ title really misses the bigger ambiguity with the Klar, whether or not the slashing attack is the weapon's shield bash or if it has two attack modes, because answering that question answers the OP pretty trivially.

Shame you can't un-FAQ posts.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Darigaaz the Igniter wrote:
I'm going to try to pull an occam's razor here and go "counts-as" =/= "is".

I'm going with "counts as" means "when applying other rules such as size increase stacking, this item counts as though it's already got shield spikes and just happens to do slashing damage so that it's a unique weapon, rather than piercing like a regular spiked shield".


The problem is that this quote is very vague and open to interpretation:

Quote:
A traditional klar counts as a light wooden shield with shield spikes; a metal klar counts as a light steel shield with shield spikes.

1) Does that make any attack with a klar a shield slam?

2) Does the klar also count as a light weapon for the purposes of benefiting from weapon finesse and two weapon fighting?

3) Is the klar's damage affected by its virtual shield spikes?
3a) If so, is the damage listed for the klar its damage before or after being modified by shield spikes?

4) Is the klar meant to be two separate weapons, with one the blade and the other the spiked shield?
4a) If two separate weapons, is the blade's damage still meant to be a shield bash and modified by the shield spikes? Because technically the shield spikes only modify the damage of a shield bash.

And then there is the issue that the bashing property doesn't seem to have language limiting it to shield bashes. So, if the klar blade is a separate non-bashing weapon, then its damage couldn't have been modified by the shield spikes and would be increased 2 times by the size increase of bashing.

Liberty's Edge

Personally I find the whole concept of "shield bash" redundant and confusing. You're just attacking with your shield; why the need for different language?

Also, I think 1d6 slashing/1d6 bludgeoning (when enchanted with Bashing) should be on the list; that's how I rule it when I GM.

It's essentially a spiked shield that does slashing instead of piercing. If you're instead going to use the cranium to inflict damage, it would then be bludgeoning. Piercing never enters the equation.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chemlak wrote:
Darigaaz the Igniter wrote:
I'm going to try to pull an occam's razor here and go "counts-as" =/= "is".
I'm going with "counts as" means "when applying other rules such as size increase stacking, this item counts as though it's already got shield spikes and just happens to do slashing damage so that it's a unique weapon, rather than piercing like a regular spiked shield".

Alright, let me try to clarify myself.

Attacking with a klar uses the stats on the table. Full Stop.
Do you have a feat/class feature/etc. that interacts with light spiked shields? A klar works with it too.

That's it.


Faq'd and James think you can see if you can have luck with how Kasatha 4-armedness and using more that 2 weapons is supposed to work?


Bear Burning Ashes wrote:

Personally I find the whole concept of "shield bash" redundant and confusing. You're just attacking with your shield; why the need for different language?

Also, I think 1d6 slashing/1d6 bludgeoning (when enchanted with Bashing) should be on the list; that's how I rule it when I GM.

It's essentially a spiked shield that does slashing instead of piercing. If you're instead going to use the cranium to inflict damage, it would then be bludgeoning. Piercing never enters the equation.

The piercing comes from the text referring to shield spikes.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

1 person marked this as a favorite.

@Talonhawke, that's a whole lot of narrow scope issues. I think a lot of more common things will likely get answered before 4 armed things.


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
Melkiador wrote:

The problem is that this quote is very vague and open to interpretation:

Quote:
A traditional klar counts as a light wooden shield with shield spikes; a metal klar counts as a light steel shield with shield spikes.

1) Does that make any attack with a klar a shield slam?

2) Does the klar also count as a light weapon for the purposes of benefiting from weapon finesse and two weapon fighting?

3) Is the klar's damage affected by its virtual shield spikes?
3a) If so, is the damage listed for the klar its damage before or after being modified by shield spikes?

4) Is the klar meant to be two separate weapons, with one the blade and the other the spiked shield?
4a) If two separate weapons, is the blade's damage still meant to be a shield bash and modified by the shield spikes? Because technically the shield spikes only modify the damage of a shield bash.

And then there is the issue that the bashing property doesn't seem to have language limiting it to shield bashes. So, if the klar blade is a separate non-bashing weapon, then its damage couldn't have been modified by the shield spikes and would be increased 2 times by the size increase of bashing.

(FTFY)

My interpretation:

1. Technically, yes, since it is established that it counts as a Light Spiked Shield, which is a single weapon. There is ambiguity that it counts as two weapons (one case where it deals 1D4 Piercing damage, as per a Light Spiked Shield, another where it deals 1D6 Slashing damage, as per the "short blade bound to the skull of a large horned lizard" description), and a possible interpretation where it counts as 3, if we included the Armor Spikes description, but for sanity's sake, let's not.

2. This is where things get contradicting. The Klar is cited as a One-handed Martial weapon, whereas a Light Spiked Shield, the item that the Klar emulates, is a Light Martial weapon. An item can't be both a Light or a One-handed weapon, it's one or the other. Sure, there is the whole Rapier thing, where it's a one-handed weapon that can be Finessed, but that's because it specifically says so. The big question is, does the fact that it counts as a Light weapon circumvent the factor that it's actually a One-handed weapon? If you can logically answer that question, you'll have your answer here.

3. Again, per the fact that it counts as a Light Spiked Shield, this means that it's already affected by Shield Spikes, especially if we want to argue that you can attack with it as a Light weapon. Because of this, it's safe to say that its damage increase is already factored in to the damage given on the table.

4. If that was the case, it would be called a Double weapon, or have two sets of damage dice, like other items that have a similar design scope. (To be honest, I kind of wish they'd do that if that was the intent, but they instead decided "Hey, let's just have people argue through the description instead!") Yes, Shield Spikes only increase the Shield Bash damage, but if you subscribe to the theory that the only attack a Klar makes is a Shield Bash, then yes, Shield Spikes would apply. As I mentioned in 3, the damage would probably already be factored in.

Bonus Round(s) What about making it a Throwing Shield? Or a Quickdraw Light Shield? If it's two "separate weapons" (a la Double weapons), would you have to enhance each "head" separately, and its effects apply based on which weapon or "head" you attack with? These are also all things that need to be "Klar-i-fied" to the messageboard public.

Trust me, when I said that the OP only grazed the surface of the minutiae of problems that the Klar is plagued with.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Trust me, when I said that the OP only grazed the surface of the minutiae of problems that the Klar is plagued with.

Well then, we should try to codify every bizarre case and put them in one easy to read post/document. That's why I numbered mine from 1 to 4, so others could tack on their own numbers. And then, when we feel like we've covered everything, maybe we can start one more FAQ thread to try to get everything addressed in one go.

Since we've already used this title, the title for the next one will be "Klarifications, what the FAQ".

Liberty's Edge

Scythia wrote:
Bear Burning Ashes wrote:

I think 1d6 slashing/1d6 bludgeoning (when enchanted with Bashing) should be on the list; that's how I rule it when I GM.

It's essentially a spiked shield that does slashing instead of piercing. If you're instead going to use the cranium to inflict damage, it would then be bludgeoning. Piercing never enters the equation.

The piercing comes from the text referring to shield spikes.

Which then relies on an interpretation of "counts as".

I believe it "counts as" a light spiked shield; that does slashing instead of piercing.

EDIT: I mentioned this in the other thread, but it bares repeating - it would be helpful if this FAQ was placed in the Golarion Rules and Questions FAQ, since Klar text has been reprinted in so many sources. Plus, it's one of those iconic elements of the game world.


I think 4 is the only question that actually matters though. Every other question is a subset of that one.

The only way for it to be a light weapon is for the blade and the shield to be separate attacks. The blade isn't a shield bash if it's a separate weapon, nor would it be under the effects of any size increase if that was the case.


Squiggit wrote:
The only way for it to be a light weapon is for the blade and the shield to be separate attacks.

It's not that simple, because "being" a light shield may very well not be the same as "counting" as one. It's like how if you put an adamantine weapon blanche on a mithril sword, the sword counts as both mithril and adamantine, while the sword is still just one item.

Quote:
The blade isn't a shield bash if it's a separate weapon, nor would it be under the effects of any size increase if that was the case.

Yes, if the blade attack isn't a shield bash, then it couldn't be benefitting from shield spikes. But an attack with the blade could still be ruled to be a shield bash, even if the klar has two separate attack modes. That may be unlikely though.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

35! Rock the house out and let's tell people so this can be 70+ FAQ clicks.

Yes, it might not answer all the issues. But they will read this thread and any issue not fleshed out, can be done here in the thread!

Liberty's Edge

If I take Weapon Focus (Light Shield), or Shield Focus (Light Shield), or any other similar selection, do those benefits apply to Klars as well?

Just another ambiguity revolving around "counts as".


Gisher wrote:
James Risner wrote:

Klar is a light shield with shield spikes, which is a virtual size increase and doesn't stack with bashing

Which of these are true: A Bashing Klar deals 1d6 slashing or piercing; 1d6 slashing or 1d8 piercing?; *or* 1d6 slashing or 2d6 piercing?

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 armor spikes; a metal klar counts as a light steel shield with armor spikes.

Let's try the third FAQ of Spiked Bashing FAQ, this time with the Klar.

It uses the same flawed "armor spikes" language and doesn't describe how the 1d6 is calculated, so both adding spikes and adding bashing are independently recommended to increase it's damage beyond 1d6.

If you check the pdf for the 2nd printing of Ultimate Equipment you will see that the "armor spikes" phrasing was removed from three of the four places where it occurred.

UE 2nd printing: Armor Descriptions, page 12 wrote:

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.
UE 2nd printing: Weapon Descriptions, page 31 wrote:

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.

I'm going to assume that the one remaining reference was left by mistake.

I understand that you don't want to debate this here, but I...

So, you are describing a change in the rules. The rules change you describe completely and unambiguously settles the question for me.

No offense, but I need to confirm it independently, examine it and stuff. I'm having trouble finding it. Can you link to it, copy and print the URL or something?

I'm looking at the list of errata from first to second printing, and I see corrections on page 11 and on page 18: nothing on page 12.


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

1) Open PDF of UE 2nd printing.
2) Turn to page 12.
3) ?
4) Profit!


Chemlak wrote:

1) Open PDF of UE 2nd printing.

2) Turn to page 12.
3) ?
4) Profit!

Okay, how do I open the PDF of UE 2nd printing? Where do I find it?


Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Chemlak wrote:

1) Open PDF of UE 2nd printing.

2) Turn to page 12.
3) ?
4) Profit!
Okay, how do I open the PDF of UE 2nd printing? Where do I find it?

For the record, the Errata changes citation document doesn't list it (and neither does the PRD). Why, I don't know. Could be a mistake forgotten to be put into the Errata document (how convenient), could be something that took place after the Errata document was published (more likely), who knows.

Regardless, you have to buy the PDF from the site in order to get the actual PDF copy from the products page in order to actually see the text for yourself. The other alternative is that you take Gisher's citation for what it is, a citation in the 2nd printing PDF. If you feel spending ~10 dollars for self-confirmation, then by all means do so. Others may not feel that way, however.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Chemlak wrote:

1) Open PDF of UE 2nd printing.

2) Turn to page 12.
3) ?
4) Profit!
Okay, how do I open the PDF of UE 2nd printing? Where do I find it?

For the record, the Errata changes citation document doesn't list it (and neither does the PRD). Why, I don't know. Could be a mistake forgotten to be put into the Errata document (how convenient), could be something that took place after the Errata document was published (more likely), who knows.

Regardless, you have to buy the PDF from the site in order to get the actual PDF copy from the products page in order to actually see the text for yourself. The other alternative is that you take Gisher's citation for what it is, a citation in the 2nd printing PDF. If you feel spending ~10 dollars for self-confirmation, then by all means do so. Others may not feel that way, however.

I'm not going to pay $10 for a book I already paid $50 for. For the time being, I will take Gisher's word for it. But Paizo MUST update their PRD or errata document! I trust they will do that soon, and the change will also appear on d20pfsrd and on the Archives of Nethys, not that Paizo can speak to those.

So, Gisher, has there been any re-wording of the Bashing Enchantment?


Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Chemlak wrote:

1) Open PDF of UE 2nd printing.

2) Turn to page 12.
3) ?
4) Profit!
Okay, how do I open the PDF of UE 2nd printing? Where do I find it?

For the record, the Errata changes citation document doesn't list it (and neither does the PRD). Why, I don't know. Could be a mistake forgotten to be put into the Errata document (how convenient), could be something that took place after the Errata document was published (more likely), who knows.

Regardless, you have to buy the PDF from the site in order to get the actual PDF copy from the products page in order to actually see the text for yourself. The other alternative is that you take Gisher's citation for what it is, a citation in the 2nd printing PDF. If you feel spending ~10 dollars for self-confirmation, then by all means do so. Others may not feel that way, however.

It was my understanding that the most up to date rules source would always be the PRD - which is where PFS GMs are told to look.

Any ruling - even posted to the boards here by the dev team - is unofficial until it hits the PRD. That's why 'FAQs' are not so easy to answer as it requires co-ordination between multiple groups and they try to have the PRD text go live at the same time as the response.

If you think that the dev team hasn't read this thread you are woefully wrong - (Hi Mark! Hi Jason!) - Paizo is very active on the forums - I'm very sure they'd love to explain what the mistake was (obviously a mistake) but they need to co-ordinate all the groups involved and hash out what they are going to keep - and the current policy would (bad for them trying to make this rule stick) mean they need to use the *CURRENT IN PRINT* rules until they can errata the book again at next printing.

This is another reason why many of us think they need to change their errata policy to work off a different schedule than the printing runs. Or for them to accept FAQ's without them having to be tied to a specific product perhaps.


The PRD states that it hasn't gotten around to that errata yet. Here is the quote from the PRD page:

Quote:
Note as of 5/19/2016: The errata released for the second printing of Ultimate Equipment has not yet been added. This update is expected to be available after our annual convention, PaizoCon, held May 27-30, 2016.

Of course, we are now a month after PaizoCon, which is why it's rare to give expected dates for things that aren't finished yet.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

And, just to help out, in case anyone's still unsure, here's the klar from page 12 of UE 2nd printing.

I absolutely agree that the PRD needs to be updated (personally, it should happen simultaneously to, or very shortly after, the errata document is released, but I understand the manpower issue) as soon as possible to reflect this, especially since the errata document is incorrect.


Chemlak wrote:

And, just to help out, in case anyone's still unsure, here's the klar from page 12 of UE 2nd printing.

I absolutely agree that the PRD needs to be updated (personally, it should happen simultaneously to, or very shortly after, the errata document is released, but I understand the manpower issue) as soon as possible to reflect this, especially since the errata document is incorrect.

Thank you, Chemlak.

Has there been any re-wording/revising of the Bashing Enchantment?


Bashing is from the Core rulebook, so it shouldn't have been reprinted very recently.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chemlak wrote:

And, just to help out, in case anyone's still unsure, here's the klar from page 12 of UE 2nd printing.

I absolutely agree that the PRD needs to be updated (personally, it should happen simultaneously to, or very shortly after, the errata document is released, but I understand the manpower issue) as soon as possible to reflect this, especially since the errata document is incorrect.

Wow, this is really weird: the traditional Klar has Armor Spikes: the metal Klar has Shield Spikes?

WTFPDT???!!!!!

What kind of sick joke are you trying to play on us, Paizo Publishing? Poor Chemlak and Gisher paid money for this!

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

5 people marked this as a favorite.

It's called an obvious typo, both supposed to be shield spikes.


Ckorik wrote:
It was my understanding that the most up to date rules source would always be the PRD - which is where PFS GMs are told to look.

I accept published, allowed rulebooks as authoritative.

Ckorik wrote:
Any ruling - even posted to the boards here by the dev team - is unofficial until it hits the PRD.

I accept FAQs, errata, and Official Rules Posts.

Ckorik wrote:

That's why 'FAQs' are not so easy to answer as it requires co-ordination between multiple groups and they try to have the PRD text go live at the same time as the response.

If you think that the dev team hasn't read this thread you are woefully wrong - (Hi Mark! Hi Jason!) - Paizo is very active on the forums - I'm very sure they'd love to explain what the mistake was (obviously a mistake) but they need to co-ordinate all the groups involved and hash out what they are going to keep - and the current policy would (bad for them trying to make this rule stick) mean they need to use the *CURRENT IN PRINT* rules until they can errata the book again at next printing.

They definitely need to fix it by public posting, though. Honestly, I don't see why it should be so hard. They should just get together, discuss it, maybe whip up a character with the feature in question, and playtest it a little, then decide how they feel about it. Then meanwhile clarify what the rules are at present, take comments from the community, and announce changes as and when they feel they are necessary.

What I see as being hard--but very important--is a search engine for the FAQs, and advanced search options for the message boards, so we can do searches that filter out for Official Rules Posts. Because honestly, I don't care what the rules are as long as I know what they are.

Ckorik wrote:
This is another reason why many of us think they need to change their errata policy to work off a different schedule than the printing runs. Or for them to accept FAQ's without them having to...

Maybe


James Risner wrote:
It's called an obvious typo, both supposed to be shield spikes.

I'm sure they were both supposed to be shield spikes, but they aren't!

Now there really are 2 Klars, and it's official!

I know which Klar I like better.


It says" counts Light wooden shield with armor spikes; metal counts as light metal shield with shield spikes "

So it didn't really answer anything.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
It's called an obvious typo, both supposed to be shield spikes.

They aren't supposed to be making obvious typos. They are supposed to proofread this stuff before they published this the first time.

They just came up with a large set of errata for this book, and they forgot to fix it a second time.

Third time's a charm? Well this is a Limited Wish, half your wish came true.

Now officially there are 2 Klars, one has Shield Spikes; one doesn't!

People are paying money for these "obvious typos" that aren't being fixed!

They are inviting players to exploit the rules, and they are inviting GMs to ignore the rules!

I repeat,

WTFPDT????!!!!

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Scott Wilhelm wrote:


What I see as being hard--but very important--is a search engine for the FAQs

This will help you immensely.


Melkiador wrote:

The problem is that this quote is very vague and open to interpretation:

Quote:
A traditional klar counts as a light wooden shield with shield spikes; a metal klar counts as a light steel shield with shield spikes.
1) Does that make any attack with a klar a shield slam?

Sorry to be splitting hairs, but Shield Slam is a Feat. I think you mean Shield Bash.

My answer is, yes: a Klar is a Shield. An attack with a shield is a Shield Bash. So unless you are throwing it or performing a combat maneuver with it or something, an attack with a Klar is a Shield Bash. The damage is given on the table. For the Klar, it is 1d6 Slashing.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
There is ambiguity that it counts as two weapons (one case where it deals 1D4 Piercing damage, as per a Light Spiked Shield, another where it deals 1D6 Slashing damage, as per the "short blade bound to the skull of a large horned lizard" description),

I don't see this as ambiguous. Specific trumps general. The Metal Klar counts as a light, spiked shield that does 1d6 Slashing on a shield bash instead of 1d4 Piercing.

There isn't any language within the Klar to suggest that the Klar's blade is in any way a separate weapon from the Klar. You wouldn't say that a sword's blade is a different weapon from the handle, would you?

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
and a possible interpretation where it counts as 3, if we included the Armor Spikes description, but for sanity's sake, let's not.

Armor Spikes are a separate weapon, a Light Weapon that does 1d6 Piercing, and does an extra 1d6 Piercing upon a successful Grapple Check. Oddly enough, this is well-described and easy to explain using the rules. Though it is infuriatingly counter-intuitive.

I can't think of what use I would put Armor Spikes on a Klar to. If I wanted Armor Spikes, I would definitely put them on my Armor. If I had a Grappling character with a Klar, I would make the Klar a throwing Klar just to be able to get rid of it as a Free Action the moment before initiating a Grapple. So what to use it for? So I could have 1 set of spikes made of Alchemal Silver and 1 made of Adamantine to match my Mithril Armor and Cold Iron Klar? So I could give 1 set of Armor Spikes the Flaming Enchantment and the other the Shocking Enchantment? I guess, but is it even against the rules to have more than 1 set of Armor Spikes on the same suit of armor? I don't think it is. So, why? Will it weigh less?

The main impact that of the Traditional Klar counting as a Light Shield with Armor Spikes clearly is that the Traditional Klar's Shield Bashing Damage is not due to any Virtual Size Increase and there is no not-Stacking problem like with the Shield Spikes of the Metal Klar.

Melkiador wrote:
2) Does the klar also count as a light weapon for the purposes of benefiting from weapon finesse and two weapon fighting?

No. It is listed as a 1 handed weapon.

There is a Feat, Thunder and Fang that gives you the special ability to use the Klar as a Light Weapon.

Also, the fact that it "counts as a Light Shield..." means you can have a Quickdraw Klar, so if you are fighting multiple opponents, you can be Great Cleaving with your Earthbreaker, and when you are down to your last opponent, you can switch to Full Attacking with your Earthbreaker using a Klar in your off-hand, drawing your Quickdraw as a Free Action and getting right to work.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
2. This is where things get contradicting.

Again, I see this as a Specific Trumps General thing. Going with the idea that the Paizo Design Team is made up of grownups who mean what they say and are responsible for what they say, the Klar counts as a light shield except as specifically excepted: it's like a Light Shield, but it does 1d6 Slashing instead of 1d4 Piercing, and it counts as a 1 handed weapon instead of a light weapon, but you can take a Feat that will let you use it as a Light Weapon.

Melkiador wrote:

3) Is the klar's damage affected by its virtual shield spikes?

3a) If so, is the damage listed for the klar its damage before or after being modified by shield spikes?

As it officially stands now, for the Traditional Klar, no: it doesn't have Shield Spikes.

For the Metal Klar, yes: it counts as a Light Shield with Shield Spikes. The metal Klar's Shield Bash Damage clearly is somehow a result of something like the Shield Spike's Virtual Size Increase.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Again, per the fact that it counts as a Light Spiked Shield

Insofar as the Klar does count as a Light Shield with Shield Spikes, yes. But now there are 2 Klars, and one of them doesn't have Shield Spikes.

Melkiador wrote:

4) Is the klar meant to be two separate weapons, with one the blade and the other the spiked shield?

4a) If two separate weapons, is the blade's damage still meant to be a shield bash and modified by the shield spikes? Because technically the shield spikes only modify the damage of a shield bash.

There is no mention of the Klar being a Double Weapon or being able to make bonus attacks with it, being able to make both a primary and off-hand attack with the same Klar, anything like that.

Insofar as the Klar has Armor Spikes, that is a separate weapon. Whether you can make a Primary hand attack with the Klar and a secondary attack with the Klar's Armor Spikes is a little ambiguous, but I'm inclined to think that since the 'Spikes are on the Klar and the Klar is on your hand, attacking with the Klar's Spikes is attacking with that hand.

Melkiador wrote:
And then there is the issue that the bashing property doesn't seem to have language limiting it to shield bashes.

It doesn't!

Melkiador wrote:
So, if the klar blade is a separate non-bashing weapon, then its damage couldn't have been modified by the shield spikes and would be increased 2 times by the size increase of bashing.

So, for as long as Klars have Armor Spikes, Armor Spikes are never augmented by the Bashing Shield Enchantment. Armor Spikes are not considered part of what they are put on, but a separate weapon in their own right, enchantable as separate weapons in their own right.

Their is no language in the rules for making Klar's blade a separate thing from the Klar itself, just like there is no language making a Bastard Sword's blade a different, separate weapon from its handle. If your attack with the non-bashing-slashing Klar's Blade were not a Shield Bash, it would still be an attack with the Klar, and it still would benefit from the Bashing Enchantment. And if the attack with the Klar's Blade were not a Shield Bash, then its damage would clearly not be the result of Shield Spikes' Virtual Size Increase, so 2d6. And I guess you would have the option of Shield Bashing with it instead, doing 1d6 of Bashing or Piercing damage depending on whether it is a Tradtional or Metal klar.

I said this from the beginning. An attack with a Shield is a Shield Bash. A Klar is a Shield. An Attack with a Klar is a Shield Bash. If a Klar counts as a shield with armor spikes, a Bashing Klar does 2d6 Slashing on a Shield Bash. If a Klar counts as a Spiked Shield, it does 1d8 Slashing on a Shield Bash.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
4. If that was the case, it would be called a Double weapon, or have two sets of damage dice, like other items that have a similar design scope.

Here we agree.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Bonus Round(s) What about making it a Throwing Shield? Or a Quickdraw Light Shield? If it's two "separate weapons" (a la Double weapons), would you have to enhance each "head" separately, and its effects apply based on which weapon or "head" you attack with? These are also all things that need to be "Klar-i-fied" to the messageboard public.

I don't think any clarification is needed. As you and I both said, there is no language describing Shields, Klars, or Throwing Shields as Double Weapons or separate weapons. It seems you can both Bash with and then Throw the same Throwing Klar in the same Round, but that is because Throwing a Throwing Shield is a Free Action, not because it is a Double Weapon. And since the Bashing Enchantment enchances all the damage done by a shield, it enhances the Throwing Damage as well. So even though a Bashing Spiked Heavy Shield and a Bashing Metal Klar now do only 1d8 Damage when you Bash with them, they still do 2d6 when you Throw them.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Trust me, when I said that the OP only grazed the surface of the minutiae of problems that the Klar is plagued with.

Well, they removed half the appendix. That's better than removing none at all, right?

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Armor Spikes are a separate weapon, a Light Weapon that does 1d6 Piercing, and does an extra 1d6 Piercing upon a successful Grapple Check.

Sorry to be splitting hairs, but both of these statements are incorrect ;-)

Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Oddly enough, this is well-described and easy to explain using the rules.

Armor Spikes deal 1d4, and it's not "extra". It's simply an option available amongst many.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Armor Spikes are a separate weapon, a Light Weapon that does 1d6 Piercing, and does an extra 1d6 Piercing upon a successful Grapple Check.

Sorry to be splitting hairs, but both of these statements are incorrect ;-)

Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Oddly enough, this is well-described and easy to explain using the rules.
Armor Spikes deal 1d4, and it's not "extra". It's simply an option available amongst many.

Reviewing the Core Rulebook, I'm pretty sure about what I'm saying.

Armor Spikes, Core Rulebook wrote:
The spikes count as a martial weapon. If you are not proficient with them, you take a –4 penalty on grapple checks when you try to use them. You can also make a regular melee attack (or off-hand attack) with the spikes, and they count as a light weapon in this case. (You can't also make an attack with armor spikes if you have already made an attack with another off-hand weapon, and vice versa.) An enhancement bonus to a suit of armor does not improve the spikes' effectiveness, but the spikes can be made into magic weapons in their own right.

They really seem to be a separate weapon.

Core Rulebook, Weapons Chart wrote:
Spiked armor special 1d4 1d6

Small Spikes do 1d4; large do 1d6. That's the Core Rulebook. Where are you getting your information?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Scott Wilhelm wrote:
James Risner wrote:
It's called an obvious typo, both supposed to be shield spikes.

Now there really are 2 Klars, and it's official!

I know which Klar I like better.

There are not 2 klar and anyone who at an actual game asserted there are two (in a serious non joking way) would be asked to stop by me if I'm a player or a GM.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
James Risner wrote:
It's called an obvious typo, both supposed to be shield spikes.

Now there really are 2 Klars, and it's official!

I know which Klar I like better.

There are not 2 klar and anyone who at an actual game asserted there are two (in a serious non joking way) would be asked to stop by me if I'm a player or a GM.

According the official rules, the most recent description of the Klar, there are 2 Klars.

If you don't like it, you should petition them to change the rules.

Oh, wait a minute: you are!

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
According the official rules, the most recent description of the Klar, there are 2 Klars.

I'm asking them to change it, but we know the answer. There is no need to be pedantic, especially considering the rules, the developers, and the whole system is designed to not be interpreted this pedantically.


James Risner wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
According the official rules, the most recent description of the Klar, there are 2 Klars.
I'm asking them to change it, but we know the answer. There is no need to be pedantic, especially considering the rules, the developers, and the whole system is designed to not be interpreted this pedantically.

I'm talking about what the rules say. You are calling for a change in the rules. Any problem you have with what I'm saying is just more reason for them to fix the rules because it allows for ridiculous situations like what I described where there are 2 Klars that are very different.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
fix the rules because it allows for ridiculous situations

The rules don't allow the ridiculous situations, GM's that allow players to engage in this type of pedanticalness are what causes the ridiculous situations.


To be clear, that mention of armor spikes is currently only on the description of Klar as a shield, in the current pdf. Under the entry of Klar as a weapon, it says shield spikes every time. While I do agree that it is bad form to have missed the one mention of armor spikes and to have not mentioned the change at all in the errata document, when a klar is being used as a weapon, it does count as being a small shield with shield spikes.

What we don't know is if its damage is being effected by shield spikes by merely counting as a spiked shield. I think there has been some confusion that the klar's blade is what's counting as the spike of the shield. If you look at a picture of a klar, you can tell that the shield itself has spikes on it in addition to the blade. This is why some people feel the blade and the spiked shield must be two separate weapons, because in the picture it looks like they have that kind of relationship. But the rules text doesn't strongly support this relationship leading to a question of the intent.

For a picture of a klar:
The Shoanti Barbarian has one.

I couldn't find the closeup of the klar on the paizo site, but if you google "klar", you will find the picture of the one in the book. The shield is clearly spiked separately from the blade.


Scott Wilhelm wrote:
James Risner wrote:
It's called an obvious typo, both supposed to be shield spikes.

They aren't supposed to be making obvious typos. They are supposed to proofread this stuff before they published this the first time.

they do proofread it

The obvious typos are there anyway.

you have to deal with that.

You can either pick from competing postulates and insist that the answer that you know is wrong is objectively right anyway, or compare and contrast evidence for both sides. That makes it obvious which way to deal with the obvious typos.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So much for not debating it in the thread. :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
fix the rules because it allows for ridiculous situations
The rules don't allow the ridiculous situations, GM's that allow players to engage in this type of pedanticalness are what causes the ridiculous situations.

So it sounds a lot like you just said that it's not the rules that allow ridiculous situations, it's people following the rules that allow for ridiculous situations. Sort of like, Guns don't kill people: people kill people?

So, Pathfinder Society specifies that you are supposed to bring your character to any PFS table you want to and be able to play it. A GM who follows the rules to the letter and who allows players to follow rules to the letter is a piece of table variation that you have to expect. You can't expect every GM to selectively ignore the rules the way you do. You can't even expect every GM to selectively ignore every rule the way you do. And it doesn't take a very large minority of activist GMs who selectively ignore the rules to completely undermine all customer confidence in Pathfinder Society.

Meanwhile James, I know this is your thread, but this is a rules forum. Don't you think it would be better if we restricted the discussion to what the rules really say than your personal conduct as a Pathfinder Society GM breaking Pathfinder's rules as you see fit in the name of Paizo Publishing?

Pathfinder is written by professional grownups who are responsible for what they do.

Pathfinder players are paying customers who have the right to the rules in the rulebooks that they purchase.

Pathfinder GMs are also paying customers in addition to being customer service representatives, and have the right to those rules being consistent and workable.

The description of Ultimate Equipment that Gisher quoted and Chemlak linked to creates 2 different Klars, one of which allows player to bypass the Shield Spikes' non-stacking-virtual-size increase, and the other disallows it.

And as a paying customer, I have a problem with that.

I am trying to support your efforts to hold Paizo's feet to the fire to get them to publicly post a coherent body of rules and game mechanics about the Klar. That was what I was doing when I explained at some length how the Bashing Enchantment works with the Traditional Klar vs the Metal Klar in the context of the newly-published description of the Klar.

They have left in a phrase in their official rules that encourages player like me to exploit the rules, and GMs like you to ignore the rules.

1 to 50 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.