I see several folks talking about shields being destroyed in a single blow.
For the sake of argument I need answers to the following scenarios:
Sturdy Shield Minor (The shield has Hardness 8, HP 64, and BT 32.) lvl 4.
> 6th Level monster swings with claw and hits. Fighter says he will 'block dmg' with shield. Monster rolls and does 37 dmg. What is the resolution to both the fighter and the shield?
Sturdy shield Lesser (The shield has Hardness 10, HP 80, and BT 40.) lvl 7item
Monster hits with a bite, Fighter wants to block dmg, Damage is rolled its (for the sake of this thread) 100 hp in dmg. What does the fighter take and how much does the shield take?
Can the fighter choose to block AFTER damage is rolled?
Thanks in advance.
|
Situation 1) The Shield reduced 37 damage by its hardness, 8, resulting in 29 damage leftover that is dealt to both the PC and the Shield. The Shield is not Destroyed and not Broken.
Situation 2) The Shield reduced 100 damage by its hardness, 10, resulting in 90 damage leftover that is dealt to both the PC and the Shield. The Shield is reduced to 0 HP and is Broken>Destroyed.
Yes, the character is ALWAYS supposed to know exactly how much, and what types of damage that is being dealt before they decide to use their Reaction or not.
It's probably one of the biggest 4th wall breaking meta things in the system but the devs have stepped forward a number of times to state that this is their intent.
Excellent. thank you for a clean response!
Temperans, is there a reason you chose max rolled/extreme damage numbers for your examples? Level 6 monsters should only deal 32 damage on an Extreme, Maxed out roll - that is not representative. You'll have tons of opportunities to block these attacks without your shield being destroyed.
Most shields aren't destroyed by average single hit damage until you get to level 10-12 creatures, and even then you roll below average exactly as much as you do above - meaning that these shields will have opportunities to block on the regular well into your teens.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I chose those values to be clear on what happens to the shields.
>> Temperans, thank you for the data! It was very helpful to our group and it is most appreciated!
>>KrispyXIV, I was not making any statements about average damage only to make an example that I knew would destroy the shield.
Thanks again. I may just change things and make 'sturdy' a special rune that can be applied ONLY to shields. I am on the fence about this and my wait longer to see what changes are made by Paizo.
Again thanks to everyone posting on this thread!
|
|
This is sort of high level, but you might want to consider the Mending Lattice.
You can save it for that one insane hit that would otherwise destroy even your Sturdy Shield.
|
This is sort of high level, but you might want to consider the Mending Lattice.
You can save it for that one insane hit that would otherwise destroy even your Sturdy Shield.
Just a few things to note:
Uncommon, Abjuration, Consumable, Magical, Talisman
Source Core Rulebook pg. 568
Price 525 gp
Usage affixed to a shield or weaponThis lattice of reinforced iron is shaped into a perfect octagon. When you activate it, it negates the damage and instantly and completely repairs the affixed item.
Activate Free Action Command; Trigger The affixed item would take damage; Requirements You are a master in Crafting
So, it's an uncommon single use item that requires Master Proficiency in the Crafting skill to actually use.
That last part is the real issue: You probably have some level of Crafting as a shield user, but you might be relying on someone else in the party for repairs...
|
|
So, it's an uncommon
I wasn’t even aware of it until I rolled one randomly as a piece of loot for my players a couple weeks ago, and in that context the Uncommon tag didn’t matter so I didn’t notice it. But if one of my players had noticed it and wanted one, I’m pretty sure I’d accommodate them per the rarity advice. Honestly if I had noticed it before I rolled it, I probably would have placed one as a planned drop as soon as 13th level consumables became appropriate.
single use item
I think it’s still worthwhile as a consumable if you’re careful about when you use it.
That last part is the real issue: You probably have some level of Crafting as a shield user, but you might be relying on someone else in the party for repairs...
That is the kicker. As it happens we have two Master level crafters in our PC group and one uses a shield, but that is probably not the most common arrangement. If I were playing a shield-based character I would almost certainly train Crafting, but I’m not so sure I’d take it to Master.
It's probably one of the biggest 4th wall breaking meta things in the system but the devs have stepped forward a number of times to state that this is their intent.
Just out of curiosity, could you link to a couple of them?
Thx
Its actually Rules As Written, as there is now explicitly a Secret trait and Secret check type for rolls which are intended to be secret - and this is not the default.
So far as I am aware, damage is not Secret and is therefore public information unless your DM houserules otherwise.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's probably one of the biggest 4th wall breaking meta things in the system but the devs have stepped forward a number of times to state that this is their intent.
Just out of curiosity, could you link to a couple of them?
Thx
Sure thing, I was only able to find one with the limited time I have at the moment since it was discussed in a number of places in one way or another but here is a link to one post confirming this from these forums in a thread strikingly similar to this one. There were discussions in Discord and on various Twitch Steams which are a giant pain to find but this should work out well enough
:D
|
So far as I am aware, damage is not Secret and is therefore public information unless your DM houserules otherwise.
Oh, didn't know things were visible by default now.
How does the lack of a Secret trait on certain types of rolls interact with the GM fudging dice to try to save players and the like?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd say that the GM can definitely roll their dice behind the screen, and fudge if that's the table's playstyle.
The Secret tag is for players' rolls .
I'd say that the GM can definitely roll their dice behind the screen, and fudge if that's the table's playstyle.
The Secret tag is for players' rolls .
Not really supported by Themetricsystem's link, wherein a developer is quite clear about the expectation that damage is completely transparent.
GM's are free to run games as they see fit, but the default expectation these days is definitely that everyone at the table is a peer. For PF2, everything seems to run best when Players have all the information they need to make smart decisions.
I'd say that the GM can definitely roll their dice behind the screen, and fudge if that's the table's playstyle.
The Secret tag is for players' rolls .Not really supported by Themetricsystem's link, wherein a developer is quite clear about the expectation that damage is completely transparent.
GM's are free to run games as they see fit, but the default expectation these days is definitely that everyone at the table is a peer. For PF2, everything seems to run best when Players have all the information they need to make smart decisions.
The link is supporting the notion that the damage value is supposed to be known BEFORE the player commits/doesn't commit to using the Shield Block reaction.
That statement has nothing to do with whether the GM is rolling the damage dice out in the open (and revealing the total damage before the player Blocks or doesn't) or whether the GM is rolling/fudging the result behind a screen (and still revealing the total damage and still before the player Blocks or doesn't).
I'd say that the GM can definitely roll their dice behind the screen, and fudge if that's the table's playstyle.
The Secret tag is for players' rolls .Not really supported by Themetricsystem's link, wherein a developer is quite clear about the expectation that damage is completely transparent.
GM's are free to run games as they see fit, but the default expectation these days is definitely that everyone at the table is a peer. For PF2, everything seems to run best when Players have all the information they need to make smart decisions.
The link is supporting the notion that the damage value is supposed to be known BEFORE the player commits/doesn't commit to using the Shield Block reaction.
That statement has nothing to do with whether the GM is rolling the damage dice out in the open (and revealing the total damage before the player Blocks or doesn't) or whether the GM is rolling/fudging the result behind a screen (and still revealing the total damage and still before the player Blocks or doesn't).
Is damage called out as special somewhere in the rules?
The link supports the notion that players get to make decisions fully informed or the factors involved, absent special circumstances or considerations.
As damage is not "special", considerations applied to damage rolls likely apply to other rolls unless other circumstances apply.
You're technically correct about how it actually applies to fudging rolls behind a screen... but fudging rolls behind a screen really isn't a rules concern at all, so long as the information is presented to the players as its relevant.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Exactly, and that's why neither having to declare damage before the block, nor the fact that Secret rolls exist, forbid rolling behind a screen.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Exactly, and that's why neither having to declare damage before the block, nor the fact that Secret rolls exist, forbid rolling behind a screen.
Yes, exactly what I was pointing out. The damage total is not secret, and should be revealed. How this total is arrived at (openly or behind a screen/fudged) is a completely separate conversation and is not something discussed in any direction in that link.