At some point I am going to be a part of a campaign for pathfinder as a player (I usually GM and am a player in a 5e campaign). I want to play a human ranger with the skirmisher and guide archetypes that goes into horizon walker who utilizes the weapon and shield combat style. Haven't figured out stats or anything yet (I do know how I'll arrange it probably though, 15 pt buy) before i do, I just want to ask if this is too focused, or not focused enough.
Focused at what? That just sounds like some basic idea template of what your character is.
Yeah it is, I meant to ask would this mix be mechanically sound, or am I missing out on too much.
EDIT: because if this build would miss out on too much I'll probably just end up making a totally different character (like a cleric maybe, or a summoner). I just want to ask if this would be a decent mix.
Class:
I wouldn't bother with Horizon Walker. For a relatively small amount of money you can get any terrain you want (Boots of Friendly Terrain) and Guide already gives your allies bonuses due to terrain with no action economy issue.
Next, as soon as you multiclass your Ranger's Focus stops progressing.
While yes, you are going to get some ability to do favored enemy via Terrain Dominance I find Guide to be a better deal for the times you really need it (BBEGs etc).
So basically, do you want up to 3 Favored Enemies via Terrain Dominance or do you want up to 7/day (depending on level) of "favored enemy" vs whatever enemy you are facing?
(Personal bias alert: I am not a fan of favored enemy because if you selected the wrong favored enemy, or terrain in this case, you lose out on a major source of accuracy/damage vs things like BBEGs.)
Caveat: If you are in a campaign where enemies come primarily from one type of terrain then Terrain Dominance shifts from 'might benefit' to 'woohoo!!'.
Level: What is your expected final level?
Weapon and Shield: Not a bad style, but not the 'best' one either. Primarily for tanking rather than doing damage. IMO, other classes do tanking better while still doing damage than this style.
The 'shield and shield' method mentioned by Halek above is intended to let you benefit from Weapon Focus and Shield Master on both weapons. However, some people find this cheesy.
Race: any race that adds +2 to strength and does not penalize Dex, Con, or Wis.
Ability Scores:
15pt buy: Str 14+2race, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 7
20pt buy: Str 16+2race, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 7
Feats:
1) TWF
2) Imp. Shield Bash
3) Shield Focus, Endurance
5) Power Attack
6) Shield Master
7) Double Slice (requires +2 belt of incredible dexterity)
9) Weapon Focus <Shield>
10) Gr. Shield Focus
11) available (Shield Slam, Saving Shield or Weapon Focus?)
I really love horizon walker (probably my favorite prc) but was unsure as to if it would be appropriate in such a mix (you seem to think not... I'm inclined to agree). The reason I want to use weapon and shield is primarily so I can be tanky (which you guessed) and the thought had occurred to use two shields. I don't think I want to do that, however, so I can focus on different types of damage to bypass DR at low levels (probably a dagger) and because it will be expensive to invest in two shields at higher level (thinking of using a heavy shield as my primary "weapon" so most of my money goes there, TWF with dagger/whatever I have at higher levels for extra attacks).
The group I'm playing with are all new, and I'm likely going to be making them characters too, and I have a feeling none of them will be keen on the idea of choosing to take hits, hence the tank falls on me. I, however, love the Ranger too much to play something like a barbarian, if I'm going to play a martial, It'll be a ranger. I was thinking of generating 6 characters and letting them choose, with me picking a character based on their choices. This was just another idea of another character I might play.
Sorry for the tangent, back to the main idea.
I wanted horizon walker due to it being my favorite prc and it fits thematically with my very rough idea of the character (a wanderer familiar with many places) but that can easily be changed. The campaign will probably end before level ten, all the other kids I'm playing with are going off to college next year (I'm not... whoops kinda gave up my age a bit, haha) and I doubt it will somehow continue after that.
Perhaps using TWC would be worth it, your suggested feat progression makes sense to me, however I would not be able to get shield master or greater shield focus as combat style feats, and wouldn't it make sense to get double slice there as to avoid the required dex altogether?
If I do this, I'll probably go human for the extra feat. This opens up level two to get double slice already. Then the progression could continue replacing level 7 with something else.
Thanks for the advice.
I really love horizon walker (probably my favorite prc) but was unsure as to if it would be appropriate in such a mix (you seem to think not... I'm inclined to agree). The reason I want to use weapon and shield is primarily so I can be tanky (which you guessed) and the thought had occurred to use two shields. I don't think I want to do that, however, so I can focus on different types of damage to bypass DR at low levels (probably a dagger) and because it will be expensive to invest in two shields at higher level (thinking of using a heavy shield as my primary "weapon" so most of my money goes there, TWF with dagger/whatever I have at higher levels for extra attacks).
The group I'm playing with are all new, and I'm likely going to be making them characters too, and I have a feeling none of them will be keen on the idea of choosing to take hits, hence the tank falls on me. I, however, love the Ranger too much to play something like a barbarian, if I'm going to play a martial, It'll be a ranger. I was thinking of generating 6 characters and letting them choose, with me picking a character based on their choices. This was just another idea of another character I might play.
Sorry for the tangent, back to the main idea.
I wanted horizon walker due to it being my favorite prc and it fits thematically with my very rough idea of the character (a wanderer familiar with many places) but that can easily be changed. The campaign will probably end before level ten, all the other kids I'm playing with are going off to college next year (I'm not... whoops kinda gave up my age a bit, haha) and I doubt it will somehow continue after that.
Perhaps using TWC would be worth it, your suggested feat progression makes sense to me, however I would not be able to get shield master or greater shield focus as combat style feats, and wouldn't it make sense to get double slice there as to avoid the required dex altogether?
If I do this, I'll probably go human for the extra feat. This opens up level two to get double slice...
Two shields are cheaper than weapon and shield because you do not have to pay for weapon enhancements (Shield Master). Pay for Armor enhancements which are half the price. Same cost as enhancing one weapon.
As for DR, at a certain point that becomes less important especially if your role is to tank and others are doing the damage.
At low level you can aid another even if you cannot do damage. Alternately, you can trip, especially if your AC is high enough not to get hit on an AoO.
Early levels: have one spiked shield and one non-spiked shield. This will do 1d4 blunt or 1d6 piercing damage depending on the shield you use. DR/slashing would be your only issue.
Later levels: have regular shields with Bashing to do 1d8+strength damage and count on just doing enough damage to bypass the DR.
Regarding silver, cold iron, etc...that is what enhancement bonuses are for which thanks to Shield Master, cost you half the price (per shield).
Double Slice: Weapon and Shield does not have double slice, you cannot take it at level 2. You will need to wait until you get a belt of incredible dexterity to qualify for it which is why I suggested level 7.
Races:
Oread is a decent choice, go for the +1 Natural Armor bonus
Wereboar-Kin are also a good choice.
Oni-Spawn are a decent choice.
Of course, human isn't bad and Half-Orc is decent.
Personally, I would opt for Oread with Granite Skin if the goal is to tank although your speed would be problematic, esp without Longstrider to balance it out.
BTW, regarding Skirmisher, did you have specific tricks you wanted? Most of them do not seem that good and you are sacrificing some very good spells (such as Longstrider and Barkskin).
What do you want Horizon Walker for?
Dual Shields do have issues beyond being (arguably) a rather lame flavor, and requiring a GM to tolerate lawyering cheese about what Shield Master is supposed to do.
While people like to say that weapon stats don't matter, crappy weapon stats matter. Two-Weapon Fighting tends to suffer from low damage issues, so wielding two d4 weapons with garbage crits isn't exactly ideal.
If you use the Weapon and Shield style to get Shield Master early, you are denied access to anything two-weapon related from your Ranger Style beyond the first Two-Weapon Fighting feat. Which means no free Improved Two-Weapon Fighting and no free Two-Weapon Rend. Which means you'll need to reach 17 DEX if you want to actually put TWF to good use. Which kind of wrecks the point of going TWF Ranger to begin with. If going Two-Weapon Style, there's really not much incentive to not use a decent mainhand weapon and a weaker shield (Improved Critical and Weapon Focus don't do all that much for a shield offhand anyhow); you typically make far more attacks with your mainhand than your offhand even if using TWF.
The main reason to go Horizon Walker, at least mechanically, is to eventually get Dimensional Dervish with Astral Terrain Dominance. Generally, one level of Barbarian or Bloodrager will do a lot for a TWF Ranger - not least because Furious weapon makes breaking DR way cheaper. Two levels of Brawler can do some very cool stuff as well, since Brawler's Flurry and Ranger TWF can be linked together. One level of Medium and Champion Spirit is a tidy damage boost on two weapons.
Dual Shields do have issues beyond being (arguably) a rather lame flavor, and requiring a GM to tolerate lawyering cheese about what Shield Master is supposed to do.
While people like to say that weapon stats don't matter, crappy weapon stats matter. Two-Weapon Fighting tends to suffer from low damage issues, so wielding two d4 weapons with garbage crits isn't exactly ideal.
If you use the Weapon and Shield style to get Shield Master early, you are denied access to anything two-weapon related from your Ranger Style beyond the first Two-Weapon Fighting feat. Which means no free Improved Two-Weapon Fighting and no free Two-Weapon Rend. Which means you'll need to reach 17 DEX if you want to actually put TWF to good use. Which kind of wrecks the point of going TWF Ranger to begin with. If going Two-Weapon Style, there's really not much incentive to not use a decent mainhand weapon and a weaker shield (Improved Critical and Weapon Focus don't do all that much for a shield offhand anyhow); you typically make far more attacks with your mainhand than your offhand even if using TWF.
The damage is d8 (d6 initially), not d4. Though I agree that this is poor for damage, but his stated design goal is not damage, but tanking.
As for other feats, like TWR, 17dex is doable with a +4 belt which he will need eventually anyhow due to being limited to medium armor.
@thelivingmonkey, if your goal really is tanking there are much better builds to accomplish this. Ones that also have an easier time doing damage.
The damage is d8 (d6 initially), not d4. Though I agree that this is poor for damage, but his stated design goal is not damage, but tanking.
So... are we talking about asking/harassing the GM to read Shield Master as letting you TWF two heavy shields without any penalty, then having to have an ally strap your second heavy shield on for you - but only after you activate Lead Blades, and then running around with both your hands locked behind shields that you can't remove without help?
FYI:
Shield Master allows a character to ignore the Two-Weapon Fighting penalties on attack rolls with a shield while wielding another weapon, but not any other penalties.
The damage is d8 (d6 initially), not d4. Though I agree that this is poor for damage, but his stated design goal is not damage, but tanking.So... are we talking about asking/harassing the GM to read Shield Master as letting you TWF two heavy shields without any penalty, then having to have an ally strap your second heavy shield on for you - but only after you activate Lead Blades, and then running around with both your hands locked behind shields that you can't remove without help?
I said nothing about asking to allow TWF with two heavy shields with or without penalty but if we were to have that discussion, the GM would have to houserule against it since at the moment the rules seem to allow it.
Do you have documentation that shows it is against the rules or the author's intent?Could you provide a rule that states putting on or removing a heavy shield takes more than 1 hand?
Does your group require you to have your weapon hand free to take off or put on a heavy shield?
No group I have ever played with has.
Finally, I said nothing about Lead Blades (which he wouldn't have anyway if he is a Skirmisher).
Heavy Shield is 1d4.
Heavy Shield with spikes is 1d6.
Heavy Shield with Bashing is 1d8.
For that matter, if he were using a Clawhand Shield he could still cast spells, even with both hands occupied.
I guess we're talking about a community that required an FAQ to tell them that they didn't mean for shield master to remove *all* possible attack penalties, so never mind.
The FAQ was addressing whether Shield Master allowed you to bypass any attack penalty, or just the ones associated with TWF.
How is that relevant to whether or not two shields is allowed (probably not the intent, I concede that)?
Or that it takes more than 1 hand to put on a shield (I don't concede that in the slightest)?
I can easily see a GM houseruling that it is not allowed, and for good reason, I even called it cheesy in my first post, but that doesn't mean it isn't allowed by the rules.
To be serious, I partly (mostly?) concede your point; you can read strict RAW to say that wielding two shields is by far and away the most accurate type of TWF if you have Shield Master. The idea that Shield Master was created for any purpose other than to make offhanding a shield while wielding a proper weapon a more attractive combo is ludicrous, but I know a whole lot of people couldn't care less. Personally I'm used to seeing 'another weapon' ruled as 'not another shield, you atrocious tool', but I know others aren't so lucky, and I can only hope the best for their tainted souls.
How do you "strap on" a heavy shield using nothing but the hand/limb you're strapping it to, especially when it occupies the hand? Aggressive wiggling? I mean, a light shield at least leaves the hand free, so it makes a little more sense to say you can strap it on with it's own limb. But a heavy shield is a big, heavy thing that you have to both hold on to and strap on. This rarely comes up because it's so extremely rare and so eminently hand-waivable; and that's just fine. But if someone wants to run around fighting with two heavy shields strapped on... how exactly did they get there? Again, I know that there's no hard rule telling people this. Then again, there's no rule that says you need a hand free to don armor; shall we say that pulling an armored coat on doesn't need any hands?
To be serious, I partly (mostly?) concede your point; you can read strict RAW to say that wielding two shields is by far and away the most accurate type of TWF if you have Shield Master. The idea that Shield Master was created for any purpose other than to make offhanding a shield while wielding a proper weapon a more attractive combo is ludicrous, but I know a whole lot of people couldn't care less. Personally I'm used to seeing 'another weapon' ruled as 'not another shield, you atrocious tool', but I know others aren't so lucky, and I can only hope the best for their tainted souls.
How do you "strap on" a heavy shield using nothing but the hand/limb you're strapping it to, especially when it occupies the hand? Aggressive wiggling? I mean, a light shield at least leaves the hand free, so it makes a little more sense to say you can strap it on with it's own limb. But a heavy shield is a big, heavy thing that you have to both hold on to and strap on. This rarely comes up because it's so extremely rare and so eminently hand-waivable; and that's just fine. But if someone wants to run around fighting with two heavy shields strapped on... how exactly did they get there? Again, I know that there's no hard rule telling people this. Then again, there's no rule that says you need a hand free to don armor; shall we say that pulling an armored coat on doesn't need any hands?
So you are saying I cannot put my arm through one strap (loop) and grab a second strap (handhold) without having a free hand? LOL :)
And before you say, but you have to tighten the straps! Not all shields had straps that tightened. Not even big ones.
Heck, some large shields didn't even have two loops, just one central handhold (although that is not part of the Pathfinder version of the heavy shield).
So, whether you are using real world logic or game logic, there is nothing to say that you cannot use a single move action with only one arm available and no help to put on or take off your heavy shield.
So you are saying I cannot put my arm through one strap (loop) and grab a second strap (handhold) without having a free hand? LOL :)
And before you say, but you have to tighten the straps! Not all shields had straps that tightened. Not even big ones.
Heck, some large shields didn't even have two loops, just one central handhold (although that is not part of the Pathfinder version of the heavy shield).
What's the definition of "strapped on"? Putting your arm through a loose strap and leaving it loose?
Well whatever. You're not wrong that you could conceivably explain away "strap on" as some kind of one-handed thing. You could also argue that putting on armor with one hand or with your teeth is legit because nothing in the rules says it isn't. I conceded the point, anyhow; if people want to cheese dual-shielding into no-twf-penalty TWF and a GM doesn't have the wherewithal to stop them, that's their business. To paraphrase Caligula: "those who don't believe me are more unfortunate than wrong".
The FAQ was addressing whether Shield Master allowed you to bypass any attack penalty, or just the ones associated with TWF.
How is that relevant to whether or not two shields is allowed (probably not the intent, I concede that)?
Or that it takes more than 1 hand to put on a shield (I don't concede that in the slightest)?I can easily see a GM houseruling that it is not allowed, and for good reason, I even called it cheesy in my first post, but that doesn't mean it isn't allowed by the rules.
I mentioned that not BadBird, and I just did so because some people have in the past used Shield Master for more than the TWF penalties. In case you were thinking of that I was pointing it out.
There's no relevance to the argument about the practical details of putting on two heavy shields at once, no.
The FAQ was addressing whether Shield Master allowed you to bypass any attack penalty, or just the ones associated with TWF.
How is that relevant to whether or not two shields is allowed (probably not the intent, I concede that)?
Or that it takes more than 1 hand to put on a shield (I don't concede that in the slightest)?I can easily see a GM houseruling that it is not allowed, and for good reason, I even called it cheesy in my first post, but that doesn't mean it isn't allowed by the rules.
I mentioned that not BadBird, and I just did so because some people have in the past used Shield Master for more than the TWF penalties. In case you were thinking of that I was pointing it out.
There's no relevance to the argument about the practical details of putting on two heavy shields at once, no.
In the post above the one you quoted he referenced the FAQ.
I guess we're talking about a community that required an FAQ to tell them that they didn't mean for shield master to remove *all* possible attack penalties, so never mind.
That is what I was responding to.
It's not about tanking the best possible way, it's about using a shield and another weapon somewhat effectively, while using those ranger archetypes.
I know there are better builds out there, I just wanted to do this. I wasn't asking for a whole feat progression (though it is useful, thanks) or any sort of argument about the merits/legality of fighting with shields. I didn't know whether the archetypes would mix well together and with the idea of shield fighting thrown in the mix, whether it would work well at all. It seems like skirmisher might not be worth it, the main reason I was gonna use it was so horizon walker didn't make my spells useless as most tricks are still useful if only a limited number of times per day. If going straight ranger (which I probably will) I'll just use guide and TWC using my shield as my second weapon (can take other shield feats normally).
Thanks everyone!