| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've made a post about the issues my table has experienced with shields and shield block and how we fixed it.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wouldn't it 100% have been easier to just give out the sturdy sheilds and the better versions for free? Your specific change messes with balance A LOT.
It severely hurts non martial characters using shields. Also why in the world does Fighter get to be better with shields than EVERY OTHER class... Poor Casters basically can't use shields with your change :(
All the "mandatory items" do in a way feel bad but some people like improving their gear. There is the variant rule that has Automatic Bonus Progression I believe, that shields could also be applied to.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sturdy Shield runes would have been easier and everyone would have been able to enjoy them (its what we use at our table)
Its your table though, if its working for you and your group then rock on.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This would probably be better categorized into the homebrew subforum.
In my mind, this alteration of the rules is right in line with the Automatic Progression. I don't think that's tied to any particular choices any character makes, you just get all of the right +1s and +dices when they would come online through equipment upgrades. So I'd decouple it from proficiency and pop it in there at the item levels of the various Sturdy Shields.
If you must keep it tied to proficiency, armor proficiency seems to make more sense to me, but it's not the way I'd go.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Definitely would not recommend a change like this personally.
Shields are already extremely strong, before Shield Block is even considered - once its considered, there's a very strong argument for the status quo of limiting Shield Block to Sturdy Shields and a few specific shields intended to work with it. Shield Block on a Sturdy Shield essentially doubles the already strong damage reduction provided (passively) by Raise Shield.
Letting all shields block like a Sturdy Shield is a massive buff for Shield users, and Shields already are a massively strong use of an action - they don't really need buffs.
Its your table, and you can do what you want - but your houserules make shields absolutely insane, and a player would be crazy not to try and build a Shield into any character they make, with Bastion dedication as well if they can make it happen.
If you really hate how Shields work currently, I'd recommend the much more moderate solution of either making the Bastion feat Shield Salvation a General 3 feat to follow Shield Block, or baking it into Shield Block. That lets you block once per encounter without losing your magical items, without making an already strong choice massively stronger.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
May I suggest the shield rules proposed by Samurai.
...so I feel that just using the by level system you have would be for the best.
Yeah, I meant to remove the bit about tying it to weapon proficiency and leave it only as level based in the post. Got distracted with life and left it in.
That said, the reasoning for tying it to weapons vice armor is shields are big, broad weapons that are designed to block. They are not armor. I don't fully disagree with the thought process though, and I went back and forth on it myself. Level based is better.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps the intent of the Shield Block isn't to have it available all the time, so characters have to make choices about when to use it. The Shield cantrip certainly supports a "once per fight" usage idea.
Characters still have to make choices about when to use shield block. They're still limited by the shield's hit points and break threshold and, more importantly, the two main classes that make use of it already have other options for their single reaction (until upper levels) in the form of an attack of opportunity or the champion's reaction (probably a more more broken reaction than allowing all shields to block like the Indestructible Shield, tbh).
Shield cantrip costs no money, has no bulk, requires no hands, can be used against magic missiles (minor boon, but about as good as some of the magical shields in the book), and scales it's hardness with you automatically. And once it's broken (if it's not flat out destroyed since 35+ damage isn't that hard to do in the system around the time most of the shields start popping up), it doesn't sit there taking up your arm like a useless lump until you throw it down on the ground. Nor do you have to run back to town to buy a new one when it would take enough damage to destroy a real shield. Not saying that the 10 minute recharge is good, but it's not quite the same.
I do see the point about it blocking once per fight possibly being the design intent though as it does line up with 99% of the shields in the book (with the other 1% maybe being able to block two blows). My problem is, why lock Shield Block behind a feat if that's the case. Why make it a general thing that's available to do at all. It only blocks 6-10 damage (ignoring Sturdy Shields for a moment) once and then is gone. Just make Shield Block the special ability of the Sturdy Shield (and the Arrow-catching Shield) and call it a day.
Additionally, why are there so many feats that expand how you can use shield block and increase the number of times you can use it? The game seems to want to encourage the use of shield block, but the numbers don't allow it (except for the 18th or 19th level, rare Indestructible Shield).
I've been going through all of the shield based stuff in the book again based on the feedback to see what my group is missing and I've found some interesting things that I'm working on a post about.
Definitely would not recommend a change like this personally.
Shields are already extremely strong, before Shield Block is even considered - once its considered, there's a very strong argument for the status quo of limiting Shield Block to Sturdy Shields and a few specific shields intended to work with it. Shield Block on a Sturdy Shield essentially doubles the already strong damage reduction provided (passively) by Raise Shield.
Letting all shields block like a Sturdy Shield is a massive buff for Shield users, and Shields already are a massively strong use of an action - they don't really need buffs.
Its your table, and you can do what you want - but your houserules make shields absolutely insane, and a player would be crazy not to try and build a Shield into any character they make, with Bastion dedication as well if they can make it happen.
If you really hate how Shields work currently, I'd recommend the much more moderate solution of either making the Bastion feat Shield Salvation a General 3 feat to follow Shield Block, or baking it into Shield Block. That lets you block once per encounter without losing your magical items, without making an already strong choice massively stronger.
It's weird (this is not meant to be sarcastic or passive aggressive or whatever...tone is hard in text form), but my table hasn't found this change to make shields overpowered. In fact, none of them are planning on making a shield user in the next campaign and the one who is using the shield has sworn them off for a while due to the action tax on their use.
The +2 bonus to AC from Raise Shield is solid, but you can get that, or almost that, a number of other ways (a weapon with the Parry Trait or feats that let you fight defensively with a particular weapon style. There might be something else too).
The shield block is nice, but it doesn't actually block all that much damage and most martial characters have other options to use their reaction on, so shield block isn't always the go to. Using the standard rules, you're only able to block about 10 damage with a decent shield before the shield breaks (if it's not outright destroyed). The Sturdy Shield doubles that if you don't block a high damage critical. Compare that to the champion's reaction that can regularly prevent 2+their level damage of every damage type for an ally multiple times a fight if the front line fight semi-tactically (my group did) without worrying about losing the ability to do so. We were doing it wrong for a while and just taking 2+level off the top vice taking it from every damage type dealt to the other character and it was still ridiculous and better than shield block or the other character using an action to Raise Shield every round.
I do have a more moderate solution in mind after feedback I've gotten (though what I'm using is still working great at the table), but it requires more research. I spent half a day without power due to storms reading, mathing, and writing stuff out and I'm not comfortable with it yet.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's weird (this is not meant to be sarcastic or passive aggressive or whatever...tone is hard in text form), but my table hasn't found this change to make shields overpowered. In fact, none of them are planning on making a shield user in the next campaign and the one who is using the shield has sworn them off for a while due to the action tax on their use.
The +2 bonus to AC from Raise Shield is solid, but you can get that, or almost that, a number of other ways (a weapon with the Parry Trait or feats that let you fight defensively with a particular weapon style. There might be something else too).
The shield block is nice, but it doesn't actually block all that much damage and most martial characters have other options to...
As a GM, my experience is that a Champion with a Sturdy shield is, for all practical purposes, unthreatenable in any reasonable and level appropriate encounter that relies on physical damage. Their AC becomes so high that even hitting them becomes unreliable, and anything that then gets through they mitigate by blocking.
A monk built to take advantage of Shields plays essentially the same way - though they dont have as good a way to funnel attacks into themselves.
There simply aren't enough rounds in most encounters to accumulate enough damage to drop such a character - which is fine, since they built that way and made sacrifices to achieve it.
As it stands, these characters have to balance Shield Block against the utility of something like a SpellGuard shield with its amazing and otherwise unprecedented stacking bonus to saves. They also have to take the shield over a harder hitting weapon (well, not monks) and use some actions to make it work.
This is the first level of compromise that gets removed by buffing all shields - now, one doesn't have to make the compromise of utility or shield stability for this level of survivability.
Anyone else using a Shield isn't quite as "immortal" (the difference in AC for other classes is significant), but it still mostly mitigates expanded crit ranges for anyone who only ends up a Master in AC and hugely increases survivability in squishier characters. If they do invest in Shield Block and a Sturdy shield, absolutely anyone can be pretty sturdy.
The main cost here isn't so much the general feat (which is more costly than a Skill feat, but less than a Class feat) but the actions and moreso the item cost associated with needing a Sturdy Shield to make blocking a reliable ongoing mitigation strategy.
Most of the alternatives to shields like the Parry trait and Shield Cantrip only provide a +1 bonus (which is deceptively inferior to a +2 bonus - weirdly, I'm pretty sure its close to a 10% reduction vs a 25% in many cases) and come with their own restrictions and opportunity costs. Worse, none of them work with Bastion which allows for anyone to get Reactive Shield and get +2 AC for their Reaction which is a huge boon for many classes that don't get access natively to a good Reaction themselves.
I'm on 4 campaigns of experience now, and what I've seen only reinforces that the core design of shields leads to a lot of choices regarding them - which to use, how many resources to dedicate to them, whether a character wants to invest in blocking in addition, if its worth a dedication - and has seen more and more players adding them (or at least a lesser version) as a core part of their kit because of how shockingly good the +2 AC is.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM, my experience is that a Champion with a Sturdy shield is, for all practical purposes, unthreatenable in any reasonable and level appropriate encounter that relies on physical damage. Their AC becomes so high that even hitting them becomes unreliable, and anything that then gets through they mitigate by blocking.
This 100%. A shielded champion or monk is very difficult to hit, even with an above level monster. In my current campaign the only shield user is the Monk, even without shield block he is very hard to take out.
Shield Block is not a means to consistently reduce damage, that's what the AC bonus is there for. Shield Block is there for emergencies to keep you on your feet for one more round, not as a free boost to your hp.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM, my experience is that a Champion with a Sturdy shield is, for all practical purposes, unthreatenable in any reasonable and level appropriate encounter that relies on physical damage. Their AC becomes so high that even hitting them becomes unreliable, and anything that then gets through they mitigate by blocking.This 100%. A shielded champion or monk is very difficult to hit, even with an above level monster. In my current campaign the only shield user is the Monk, even without shield block he is very hard to take out.
Shield Block is not a means to consistently reduce damage, that's what the AC bonus is there for. Shield Block is there for emergencies to keep you on your feet for one more round, not as a free boost to your hp.
But it doesnt really do that. It only blocks 10ish points of damage a couple times before breaking and becoming a useless lump on your arm against average damage of around the shield's level (if it doesn't get outright destroyed). That's hardly worth something that costs as much as a permanent magical weapon that is practically being treated like a consumable when a lot of classes can do similar levels of damage mitigation (usually through temp hp) every round for a MUCH lower overall cost.
Shield Block is especially weak compared to the Champion's reaction which can be used an unlimited amount of times, blocks WAY more damage, can be used at range, isn't reliant on a physical attack, doesn't weigh anything, doesn't cost an action on your turn, AND has additional effects beyond mitigation.
It also doesn't explain why there are so many feats (and some magic items) that encourage you to make shield blocking a tactic but is COMPLETELY reliant on you using only one type of shield (which will still become broken fairly quickly).
If shields weren't meant to shield block, I just wish they'd have not made it a general thing and instead made the ability to shield block a special ability of the shields they wanted to allow to shield block (in a similar fashion to the Arrow-Catching Shield) and removed all the shield block based class feats.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most of the alternatives to shields like the Parry trait and Shield Cantrip only provide a +1 bonus (which is deceptively inferior to a +2 bonus - weirdly, I'm pretty sure its close to a 10% reduction vs a 25% in many cases) and come with their own restrictions and opportunity costs. Worse, none of them work with Bastion which allows for anyone to get Reactive Shield and get +2 AC for their Reaction which is a huge boon for many classes that don't get access natively to a good Reaction themselves.
I'm on 4 campaigns of experience now, and what I've seen only reinforces that the core design of shields leads to a lot of choices regarding them - which to use, how many resources to dedicate to them, whether a character wants to invest in blocking in addition, if its worth a dedication - and has seen more and more players adding them (or at least a lesser version) as a core part of their kit because of how shockingly good the +2 AC is.
The way it currently works, I'd favor a free hand fighter over a shielded one (and I love my sword and board characters) because you can get the same +2 bonus to AC and still have the freedom to actually do things. You lose out on some of the few magical shield abilities that are nice, but the dueling feats arent as restrictive and, as before, more freedom. I think two weapon fighting also gets an option to get a +2 bonus to AC. Biggest downside is that the fighter doesn't have a natural, and continuous, damage mitigator outside of shield blocking like a chunk of the other classes do. A barbarians renewed vigor is effectively a shield block every round, for example (yes, I know they lose out on the +2 to AC and are actually at an AC penalty, but still it can be EVERY round without breaking).
Serious query though, how many times in a fight SHOULD a person be able to Shield Block and mitigate 10ish damage before the shield breaks and can't be used for Raise a Shield again until it gets repaired? Let's say for an effect based shield and a sturdy shield of the same level vs enemies of around the shields level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM, my experience is that a Champion with a Sturdy shield is, for all practical purposes, unthreatenable in any reasonable and level appropriate encounter that relies on physical damage. Their AC becomes so high that even hitting them becomes unreliable, and anything that then gets through they mitigate by blocking.This 100%. A shielded champion or monk is very difficult to hit, even with an above level monster. In my current campaign the only shield user is the Monk, even without shield block he is very hard to take out.
Shield Block is not a means to consistently reduce damage, that's what the AC bonus is there for. Shield Block is there for emergencies to keep you on your feet for one more round, not as a free boost to your hp.
But it doesnt really do that. It only blocks 10ish points of damage a couple times before breaking and becoming a useless lump on your arm against average damage of around the shield's level (if it doesn't get outright destroyed). That's hardly worth something that costs as much as a permanent magical weapon that is practically being treated like a consumable when a lot of classes can do similar levels of damage mitigation (usually through temp hp) every round for a MUCH lower overall cost.
Shield Block is especially weak compared to the Champion's reaction which can be used an unlimited amount of times, blocks WAY more damage, can be used at range, isn't reliant on a physical attack, doesn't weigh anything, doesn't cost an action on your turn, AND has additional effects beyond mitigation.
It also doesn't explain why there are so many feats (and some magic items) that encourage you to make shield blocking a tactic but is COMPLETELY reliant on you using only one type of shield (which will still become broken fairly quickly).
If shields weren't meant to shield block, I just wish they'd have not made it a general thing and instead made the ability to shield block a special ability of the shields...
15
I'm not sure your math is very sound.A level 3 champion's standard shield ally blocks 7 damage. Their champion reaction blocks 5.
A level 7 champion's minor sturdy shield blocks 10 damage. This shield is 3 levels behind, and they should be looking to upgrade to the lesser, that blocks 10.
The progression will continue consistently. Now let's consider HP. Assuming average damage on a high progression, monster 2 levels above.
A level 7 champion's minor sturdy shield has 96 HP, BT 48. A level 9 creature averages 24 damage on a high attack. At 10 damage reduced each time, that takes 4 hits to break. This is a level 3 sturdy shield, that's also taking hits from a level 9 creature. That's also reducing its hit/crit chance by 10% each.
A level 13 champion, taking hits from a level 15 creature while wielding a moderate sturdy shield (level 10 item). Creature averages 36/hit. Shield has 15 hardness, 156 HP, 78 BT. Again, 4 hits required.
You'll notice this forces the enemy into a no-win situation. Either they attack the champion - with higher AC + 2 that blocks damage - or they attack the allies, which triggers the champion's reaction that also blocks damage.
Alternately, you can gain a lesser version of these benefits by taking a special shield, like Spellguard. That gets you a +2 bonus to saves against spells as well as the AC bonus.
Under your rules, a level 13 fighter with a Medusa's Scream has a 28 hardness shield, with 208 HP before it hits its BT. A level 17 creature critting averages 76 damage. So a creature 4 levels higher has to crit 5 times in a row before it can break the fighter's shield, and that's not even considering the extra AC it gives, or the fact that the fighter can pick up Reflexive Shield for +2 to Reflex, Quick Shield Block to do that twice/turn, or Paragon's Guard so that it only ever costs 1 action for the combat.
But it doesnt really do that. It only blocks 10ish points of damage a couple times before breaking and becoming a useless lump on your arm against average damage of around the shield's level (if it doesn't get outright destroyed). That's hardly worth something that costs as much as a permanent magical weapon that is practically being treated like a consumable when a lot of classes can do similar levels of damage mitigation (usually through temp hp) every round for a MUCH lower overall cost.
Shield Block is especially weak compared to the Champion's reaction which can be used an unlimited amount of times, blocks WAY more damage, can be used at range, isn't reliant on a physical attack, doesn't weigh anything, doesn't cost an action on your turn, AND has additional effects beyond mitigation.
It also doesn't explain why there are so many feats (and some magic items) that encourage you to make shield blocking a tactic but is COMPLETELY reliant on you using only one type of shield (which will still become broken fairly quickly).
If shields weren't meant to shield block, I just wish they'd have not made it a general thing and instead made the ability to shield block a special ability of the shields...
In general, the hardness of a Sturdy shield is equal to or greater than the damage reduction of the Champion's reaction power at the same level of the Shield. I show that the Champion Reaction catches up at level 13, and pulls ahead at 16. The idea that a Sturdy Shield 'only' blocks 10 damage isn't factual for half the levels of the game.
Not to mention that Shields aren't competing with Champion's Reaction - they can be used by any class with a modest investment. They happen to synergize particularly well for Champions because it allows Champions to set up no-win scenarios where their opponents can't attack anywhere without their attack being mitigated.
As well, you're not considering what the damage reduction actually represents - its 8-20 damage reduced against an attack that is unlikely to be a crit, meaning its a significant portion of the damage dealt by the attack reduced. Further, due to the nature of Raise Shield - its probably mitigating their most damaging attack, since subsequent attacks getting through is unlikely and unreliable to begin with.
Plus, fun facts - if you compare the hardness of sturdy shields to the High Damage Strike damage value of equal level creatures, their expected damage mitigation on a Shield Block ranges from just over 50% at low levels and remains just under 50% of the expected damage per strike. About 50% of the damage of an attack that gets through is extremely powerful, and nowhere near minor.
At mid to high levels, a Champion or Monk with a modest investment in Shields and a Sturdy shield can solo an equal level or level +1 foe in many cases and come out of the fight with no loss in hitpoints because of their mitigation and completely renewable self healing.
Its gross to watch in play.
Shield Block is not a "free" mechanic, nor is it supposed to be based on what can be intuited from the balance of the Bastion Dedication - the ability to block with a low hardness/hp shield once per combat is considered equivalent to a 12th level class feat.
That is entirely consistent with how incredible powerful I've seen them being. Like many things in Pathfinder 2E, you have to look at the whole picture and actually witness these mechanics working in encounters to really appreciate exactly how powerful Shield Block with a Sturdy Shield is, and to appreciate why its so costly both in item and opportunity cost (IE, the cost of not using another shield).
...As a GM, my experience is that a Champion with a Sturdy shield is, for all practical purposes, unthreatenable in any reasonable and level appropriate encounter that relies on physical damage. Their AC becomes so high that even hitting them becomes unreliable, and anything that then gets through they mitigate by blocking.This 100%. A shielded champion or monk is very difficult to hit, even with an above level monster. In my current campaign the only shield user is the Monk, even without shield block he is very hard to take out.
Shield Block is not a means to consistently reduce damage, that's what the AC bonus is there for. Shield Block is there for emergencies to keep you on your feet for one more round, not as a free boost to your hp.
But it doesnt really do that. It only blocks 10ish points of damage a couple times before breaking and becoming a useless lump on your arm against average damage of around the shield's level (if it doesn't get outright destroyed). That's hardly worth something that costs as much as a permanent magical weapon that is practically being treated like a consumable when a lot of classes can do similar levels of damage mitigation (usually through temp hp) every round for a MUCH lower overall cost.
Shield Block is especially weak compared to the Champion's reaction which can be used an unlimited amount of times, blocks WAY more damage, can be used at range, isn't reliant on a physical attack, doesn't weigh anything, doesn't cost an action on your turn, AND has additional effects beyond mitigation.
It also doesn't explain why there are so many feats (and some magic items) that encourage you to make shield blocking a tactic but is COMPLETELY reliant on you using only one type of shield (which will still become broken fairly quickly).
If shields weren't meant to shield block, I just wish they'd have not made it a general thing and instead made the ability to shield block a
Outside of the Sturdy Shield (and about half of those), the vast majority of shields block 10ish points of damage (or less) per block. A champions divine ally absolutely boosts it, but it should be a boost, not the main thing to balance against. A Fighter (and bastion) has a ton of options that encourage shield blocking and is missing the ability to boost the shields hardness and hp.
Even still, my math WAS a bit off.
Additionally, a 13th level fighter with the medusa's scream would have hardness 23 and 156 hp before breaking (they're only master with simple/martial weapons at 13. Legendary with a single group), but your point mostly still stands.
The main point is why is shield block a general thing when it's really only meant for Sturdy Shields? Why not just build it into Sturdy Shields? Why make a bunch of feats and an entire archetype that's built around having access to (effectively) one specific magic item?
But it doesnt really do that. It only blocks 10ish points of damage a couple times before breaking and becoming a useless lump on your arm against average damage of around the shield's level (if it doesn't get outright destroyed). That's hardly worth something that costs as much as a permanent magical weapon that is practically being treated like a consumable when a lot of classes can do similar levels of damage mitigation (usually through temp hp) every round for a MUCH lower overall cost.
Shield Block is especially weak compared to the Champion's reaction which can be used an unlimited amount of times, blocks WAY more damage, can be used at range, isn't reliant on a physical attack, doesn't weigh anything, doesn't cost an action on your turn, AND has additional effects beyond mitigation.
It also doesn't explain why there are so many feats (and some magic items) that encourage you to make shield blocking a tactic but is COMPLETELY reliant on you using only one type of shield (which will still become broken fairly quickly).
If shields weren't meant to shield block, I just wish they'd have not made it a general thing and instead made the ability to shield block a special ability of the shields...
In general, the hardness of a Sturdy shield is equal to or greater than the damage reduction of the Champion's reaction power at the same level of the Shield. I show that the Champion Reaction catches up at level 13, and pulls ahead at 16. The idea that a Sturdy Shield 'only' blocks 10 damage isn't factual for half the levels of the game.
Not to mention that Shields aren't competing with Champion's Reaction - they can be used by any class with a modest investment. They happen to synergize particularly well for Champions because it allows Champions to set up no-win scenarios where their opponents can't attack anywhere without their attack being mitigated.
As well, you're not considering what the damage reduction actually represents - its 8-20 damage reduced against an...
I'll concede most of that, though when shield block gets brought up, champion is the only class that gets discussed so it IS competing with the Champions reaction since its either or for much of the game. The fact that a champions reaction reduces each damage type a single attack deals means you're able to double the DR it does often enough against quite a few creatures, but I mostly get your point.
Anyways, a fighter using a non-sturdy shield can block once before breaking it around the level they get it and a sturdy shield allows for 3ish? A champion with divine ally effectively increases that by 1. Why not just say that and ignore a shields hp? It's way simpler and let's shields scale without requiring any wackiness.
I still HATE that an entire archetype and a good chunk of shield related feats are effectively reliant on you using a single specific magic item for it to be effective. Nothing else does that.
Outside of the Sturdy Shield (and about half of those), the vast majority of shields block 10ish points of damage (or less) per block. A champions divine ally absolutely boosts it, but it should be a boost, not the main thing to balance against. A Fighter (and bastion) has a ton of options that encourage shield blocking and is missing the ability to boost the shields hardness and hp.
Even still, my math WAS a bit off.
Additionally, a 13th level fighter with the medusa's scream would have hardness 23 and 156 hp before breaking (they're only master with simple/martial weapons at 13. Legendary with a single group), but your point mostly still stands.
The main point is why is shield block a general thing when it's really only meant for Sturdy Shields? Why not just build it into Sturdy Shields? Why make a bunch of feats and an entire archetype that's built around having access to (effectively) one specific magic item?
Because that actually makes it a choice. You have to choose between the best blocking in existence or other abilities. Do you want the ability to block more, or do you want the passive bonuses of the Spellguard Shield? The defense of the Sturdy or offense of Lion? You can even go with a weaker shield that has better passive bonuses (like the Force or Spellguard shield), and use a different reaction as the primary such as AoO, swashbuckler's riposte, or the champion reaction.
And on average, a shield has Hardness equal to its level. That's still quite a substantial amount. It just can't block quite as much consistently, since a Sturdy Shield's primary bonuses are +2 hardness and double the HP.
I still HATE that an entire archetype and a good chunk of shield related feats are effectively reliant on you using a single specific magic item for it to be effective. Nothing else does that.
This also isn't really factual. The Sturdy Shield may be the best shield for blocking - and given a range of choices for any given thing, something is always going to be the best - but its hardly the ONLY viable option. Its just the Common, Intended to be available option to ensure Shield Builds have something to work with.
The Spined Shield, Force Shield, Dragonslayers Shield, Forge Warden, Arrow Catching Shield (post errata, apparently), Jawbreaker Shield, Medusas Scream (and Greater), Reforging Shield (especially this one), Nethysian Shield, Indestructible Shield and Shield of the Unified Legion - quite a range, now - all have stats that provide useful damage reduction at their level.
And you should never have a shield completely destroyed, since you are intended to know how much damage you're blocking when you declare the reaction.
I think you may be undervaluing the benefit of discreet utility and defensive benefits in addition to the totally optional benefit of a surge of hitpoints/resistance.
Shield Block isn't intended to be an "always" solution or reaction, its pretty clearly intended (based on reviewing the available shields and the fact that most will break when blocked with more than once) to be a choice to sacrifice your persistent AC bonus in exchange for a few extra hitpoints right now - With the exception of those Shield choices specifically designed to support the Shield Block mechanic specifically, best among which is the Sturdy Ahield.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Outside of the Sturdy Shield (and about half of those), the vast majority of shields block 10ish points of damage (or less) per block. A champions divine ally absolutely boosts it, but it should be a boost, not the main thing to balance against. A Fighter (and bastion) has a ton of options that encourage shield blocking and is missing the ability to boost the shields hardness and hp.
Even still, my math WAS a bit off.
Additionally, a 13th level fighter with the medusa's scream would have hardness 23 and 156 hp before breaking (they're only master with simple/martial weapons at 13. Legendary with a single group), but your point mostly still stands.
The main point is why is shield block a general thing when it's really only meant for Sturdy Shields? Why not just build it into Sturdy Shields? Why make a bunch of feats and an entire archetype that's built around having access to (effectively) one specific magic item?
Because that actually makes it a choice. You have to choose between the best blocking in existence or other abilities. Do you want the ability to block more, or do you want the passive bonuses of the Spellguard Shield? The defense of the Sturdy or offense of Lion? You can even go with a weaker shield that has better passive bonuses (like the Force or Spellguard shield), and use a different reaction as the primary such as AoO, swashbuckler's riposte, or the champion reaction.
And on average, a shield has Hardness equal to its level. That's still quite a substantial amount. It just can't block quite as much consistently, since a Sturdy Shield's primary bonuses are +2 hardness and double the HP.
But you're not choosing between blocking a lot or blocking a little. You're choosing to be able to block at all vs quite possibly losing the ability to use the shield at all if you do once.
Most of the non-sturdy shields in the core rulebook have a hardness of 6-10 (average 7.25) and 24 hp (average 28.75). The average damage is 20-24 for those levels, which is about enough to break most shields around the time you get them (only 22 damage is required to break all the hardness 10/24 hp shields, 18 for the ridiculous number of hardness 6/24 hp shields).
Additionally, that doesn't explain the precious material shields, which have no real ability to speak of, and can maybe block once without breaking for a few levels (big maybe). Or why there are so many feats tied to encouraging you to shield block that practically require you to only use one magical shield for them to be of use at all when no other tactical option has that limitation.
Reading the class entries, it's like the game is telling you "hey, grab a shield, take these feats, and block a bunch! It'll be great!" Then you get to the treasure section and it's all "Whoa, Whoa, Whoa! You wanted to block? No, no, no. Don't look at any of these shiny things. ONLY use THIS one, otherwise those feats you chose are practically garbage. Have fun!"
It's this bait and switch that bothers me the most and why I, and many others, have issues with how shield block works with the existing shields.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The annoying thing about Shields in 2e is that they have more Feat options than any other fighting style in the game. But once you start investing any Feats into Shields the loss from choosing a non study option grows on a steep linear curve. With something like shield of reckoning and quick block you could have triple the opportunities to shield block but without a sturdy Shield your probably only get one block in before you shield breaks making those Feats almost useless.
This. There's no other tactical option that has that limitation.
But you're not choosing between blocking a lot or blocking a little. You're choosing to be able to block at all vs quite possibly losing the ability to use the shield at all if you do once.
Given that most encounters run around 3 rounds, this is in general exactly the choice you are making in the system as it stands. Block a little - once or maybe twice - and give up your shield for the encounter, OR block without restraint by taking the Sturdy Shield which has that as its function/perk.
Most characters won't have enough reactions in an encounter to make more than 2-3 blocks viable anyway, meaning that if shields other than studies could survive that while still functioning you've essentially removed the Choice between base function and utility that currently exists.
I still HATE that an entire archetype and a good chunk of shield related feats are effectively reliant on you using a single specific magic item for it to be effective. Nothing else does that.
This also isn't really factual. The Sturdy Shield may be the best shield for blocking - and given a range of choices for any given thing, something is always going to be the best - but its hardly the ONLY viable option. Its just the Common, Intended to be available option to ensure Shield Builds have something to work with.
The Spined Shield, Force Shield, Dragonslayers Shield, Forge Warden, Arrow Catching Shield (post errata, apparently), Jawbreaker Shield, Medusas Scream (and Greater), Reforging Shield (especially this one), Nethysian Shield, Indestructible Shield and Shield of the Unified Legion - quite a range, now - all have stats that provide useful damage reduction at their level.
And you should never have a shield completely destroyed, since you are intended to know how much damage you're blocking when you declare the reaction.
I think you may be undervaluing the benefit of discreet utility and defensive benefits in addition to the totally optional benefit of a surge of hitpoints/resistance.
Shield Block isn't intended to be an "always" solution or reaction, its pretty clearly intended (based on reviewing the available shields and the fact that most will break when blocked with more than once) to be a choice to sacrifice your persistent AC bonus in exchange for a few extra hitpoints right now - With the exception of those Shield choices specifically designed to support the Shield Block mechanic specifically, best among which is the Sturdy Ahield.
Force Shield, Dragons Slayer Shield, and Forge Warden are not blocking shields. Each take 22-24 damage before breaking (just about average damage when you get them) despite half of the Forge Warden's magic triggering on a shield block.
Jawbreaker and Medusa's Scream are okayish. You can comfortably block an average attack and not worry about it breaking. Two is starting to get sketchy. You can throw the Adamantine Shield into this category as well, but it has no cool ability to make up for its lack of blocking.
Reforging Shield and Arrow-catching are just a step behind sturdy shields (of the same level) with an ability and are is a good, but Reforging is a rare option. The Spined Shield should probably go in this category as well (it's very bad hardness being made up for with the extra go from the spines) and is the most interesting of them since you have to weigh offense against defense each time you use it (though I think the champion in my game used it offensively...twice maybe In the several levels he had it)
Indestructible Shield is a rare level 19 shield. It's blocks less than the Sturdy Shield, but can literally block every round of the fight.
The Shield of the Unified Legion is NOT a blocking shield. Average damage around the level you get it means it's close to breaking, if not broken. It's an amazing enchantment, but it's 20th level and if you spent any class feats on shield block while you leveled they're just shy of a waste.
So, four options for actually making use of shield block (and the feats to modify it), one of which is rare, and only one of which you can scale up with you. The other options that are only okay at blocking also don't scale with you (except Medusa's Scream) mean the shield blocking feats are a STEEP price - if not a waste.
I'm not discounting the effects of the semi-passive bonuses you can get from a shield. They're very good, but there are a handful of other options that can ALSO give you the +2 bonus to AC and have different additional bonuses. That and primarily the fact that you're funneled towards one shield that scales with you if you want to use your shield block feats.
The only other tactic that's kind of close to that is finesse weapon fighting, but you can scale all of the options, add other wangy magic, and get an AC boost if you're a rogue or fighter/Duelist/two-Weapon fighter.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously you keep a special shield in one hand and a sturdy shield in the other.
Which is idiotic looking.
Or, you know, choose one benefit or the other (blocking or utility) but not both?
The design intent appears to be that you must choose between benefits - not for you to be able to get everything you want with no compromises.
That's also the fundamental building block of most RPG design in general, with choosing to excel in one area costing you strength in others.
If you want Shields that don't compromise on durability for utility, by all means make that happen in your home game - but that sort of "characters get everything they want with no compromises" design is pretty antithetical to the design of most games, and feels unwarranted to me in PF2E where shields in general - including non-sturdy shields - are already a pretty optimal choice for many characters (essentially any character with the actions or feats to support them).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But you're not choosing between blocking a lot or blocking a little. You're choosing to be able to block at all vs quite possibly losing the ability to use the shield at all if you do once.
Given that most encounters run around 3 rounds, this is in general exactly the choice you are making in the system as it stands. Block a little - once or maybe twice - and give up your shield for the encounter, OR block without restraint by taking the Sturdy Shield which has that as its function/perk.
Most characters won't have enough reactions in an encounter to make more than 2-3 blocks viable anyway, meaning that if shields other than studies could survive that while still functioning you've essentially removed the Choice between base function and utility that currently exists.
I guess I can see that, but it's still annoying that sturdy (and Medusa's to a lesser extent) are the only ones that can scale with you.
What if you ignored HP and just said you can shield block once with shields. A second time results in a dc 10 flat check with success being the shield being broken and a failure being broken.
Medusa's, Jawbreaker, Arrow-catching, Reforging, and Adamantine shields gain one extra time to block before the flat check, while Sturdy gain 2 extra times.
Effectively the same(?) But all shields scale with you without modifying shield stats?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll be honest, I haven't used shields in PF2 because they're too fiddly and kill a lot of other options for the chance to 'perhaps' mitigate some damage for a non-Champion.
Having to sit there and repair the shield very downtime while other people are doing nifty things doesn't sound very fun at all.
I really don't understand why they simplified a lot of other things for PF2, but then made shields the new 'Grapple' of this edition.
When people would rather eschew a defensive feature that's too fiddly, that changes the dynamic and crit threshholds/mitigation, leading to far more dangerous encounters (based on my limited L1 play).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Amusingly, that's similar to the dent mechanic that shields had in the playtest, but people didn't care for it.
It was less that people didn't care for it and more that the rules didn't make sense. It was one of those "if it takes up to its hardness, then zero dents, if it takes up to double, its one dent, and more than that is two dents" except so poorly worded that we had to ask for clarification multiple times with multiple scenarios ("ok 5 hardness and 10 damage, how many dents? What about 15 damage?") combined with some additional rules from elsewhere and one clarification post from a designer that just muddied the waters.
It could have worked. But it was poorly worded with a bad example that figuring out how the rules ACTUALLY WORKED was frustrating and confusing.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, I'm not trying to be a dick or purposely obtuse. Despite what it possibly seems like, this whole thing has helped me a lot. In understanding and in what my real issue with shields is.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do what I do: Make it impossible to permanently destroy a shield in one hit, then wait for more shields to be added to the game.
Like Krispy said, the +2 AC from raise is nice. Having the option to temporarily break your shield for a reduction in a big hit can actually come in handy when you're not weighing it against the entire value of the shield.
What has always bothered me the most is that shields have a limited shelf life like no other magic item (use them a couple levels after you find them and you're just asking for them to get destroyed) and they put you in uncomfortable, meta-gamey scenarios with relative frequency.
A blanket "no shield can be permanently destroyed in one hit" rule does a lot of work, and as more balanced shields come out dedicated shield blockers get more realistic options.
Do what I do: Make it impossible to permanently destroy a shield in one hit, then wait for more shields to be added to the game.
Like Krispy said, the +2 AC from raise is nice. Having the option to temporarily break your shield for a reduction in a big hit can actually come in handy when you're not weighing it against the entire value of the shield.
What has always bothered me the most is that shields have a limited shelf life like no other magic item (use them a couple levels after you find them and you're just asking for them to get destroyed) and they put you in uncomfortable, meta-gamey scenarios with relative frequency.
A blanket "no shield can be permanently destroyed in one hit" rule does a lot of work, and as more balanced shields come out dedicated shield blockers get more realistic options.
Yeah, I was kindof sad when this was added as a 12th level dedication locked feat instead of as a level 7 talisman (where I would have personally put it) in the APG.
I think this materially addresses a lot of people's concerns about "not being able to block" with many shields, without erasing the substantial and meaty choice of having to weigh Shield Blocking usability and utility.
A 7th level talisman would really come online around level 10 where its cheap enough to buy in numbers right as average damage from enemy strikes is beginning to threaten some of the lighter magical shields. It'd require significant time cost to reset, without being completely onerous.
Do what I do: Make it impossible to permanently destroy a shield in one hit, then wait for more shields to be added to the game.
Like Krispy said, the +2 AC from raise is nice. Having the option to temporarily break your shield for a reduction in a big hit can actually come in handy when you're not weighing it against the entire value of the shield.
What has always bothered me the most is that shields have a limited shelf life like no other magic item (use them a couple levels after you find them and you're just asking for them to get destroyed) and they put you in uncomfortable, meta-gamey scenarios with relative frequency.
A blanket "no shield can be permanently destroyed in one hit" rule does a lot of work, and as more balanced shields come out dedicated shield blockers get more realistic options.
Yeah, I was kindof sad when this was added as a 12th level dedication locked feat instead of as a level 7 talisman (where I would have personally put it) in the APG.
I think this materially addresses a lot of people's concerns about "not being able to block" with many shields, without erasing the substantial and meaty choice of having to weigh Shield Blocking usability and utility.
A 7th level talisman would really come online around level 10 where its cheap enough to buy in numbers right as average damage from enemy strikes is beginning to threaten some of the lighter magical shields. It'd require significant time cost to reset, without being completely onerous.
That's kind of why I asked the thing I did.
If a "non-blocking" shield is potentially okay for blocking one average hit around the level you get it (an no other way to improve that shield like like weapons and armor), is there anything wrong with saying that it can just block one hit that deals damage greater than it's hardness between repairs without being repaired for it's entire lifespan? With a second block giving roughly a 50-50 chance of simply being broken or destroyed? No changes to it's hardness or anything.
If a Sturdy Shield is good for about 3ish(?) hits around the level that it pops up, isn't fine to just say it's good for three shield blocks between repairs, only needing to upgrade to the higher versions for increased hardness? A fourth time resulting in an almost 50-50 chance of breaking or being destroyed.
The ones that aren't as good as Sturdy Shields, but are still considered "blocking" shields seem to be good for about 2 hits around the level they appear, so 2 hits between repairs and a third has a 50-50 shot a being broken or destroyed.
Divine Shield Ally would increase the number of hits a shield could take by one. Shield Salvation would just mean that once per day if you failed the DC 10 flat check, the shield is broken rather than destroyed. Fortifying Pebble would absorb one hit (or increase it's hardness by 2 if that's thought to be too much). Indestructible Shield never has to make the DC 10 flat check.
It doesn't stop the funneling towards Sturdy Shields if you devote any of your class feats towards improving Shield Block, but it at least means a shield has the same level of effectiveness throughout the entire career of a character as when it first appears. And I don't have a second pool (or third if you use the Stamina rules) of hit points to track per character with a shield. Well, okay, it's still an additional pool, its just one that could be tracked with tick marks.
If you wanted an extra layer of granularity, critical hits could count as two hits. I don't think that's really needed since it's still only blocking the same amount of damage regardless of whether the hit is a critical or not and you're still taking a bunch of damage.
That's kind of why I asked the thing I did.
If a "non-blocking" shield is potentially okay for blocking one average hit around the level you get it (an no other way to improve that shield like like weapons and armor), is there anything wrong with saying that it can just block one hit that deals damage greater than it's hardness between repairs without being repaired for it's entire lifespan? With a second block giving roughly a 50-50 chance of simply being broken...
As noted previously, thats pretty similar to the Dents system we had in playtest. If you can find a copy, I'd reccomend checking it out - it wasn't really bad or anything.
I believe that on addition to players apparently just not liking it much, a core design issue was that it didn't allow for a shield to be destroyed outright under any circumstances, regardless of how much damage was taken - which was determined to not be undesirable.
So we ended up with a system that is relatively simple to play (beyond tracking an extra hitpoint pool), but where its maybe a bit too easy for a shield to be destroyed outright.
Theres nothing "wrong" with the house rule format you've presented - for me though, its extra complication on top of a system which is currently very functional if not 100% perfect, and which power balance wise is already top of the chart for optimization which makes me extremely leery of any fix to the shield system which makes shields at all stronger.
If I were going to go full houserule on this subject, which I generally don't, I personally think I'd change the "Destroyed" state of items (not just shields) to ultimately be repairable - but such repairs would be a downtime activity (requiring at least a day) instead of an exploration activity which is valid for merely Broken items. The goal being to fix, in general, the disproportionate damage that players (and only players) suffer when items are completely destroyed instead of just broken. Maybe there could be an associated gold cost as well... but more of a fee, than a need to replace the item entirely.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I were going to go full houserule on this subject, which I generally don't, I personally think I'd change the "Destroyed" state of items (not just shields) to ultimately be repairable - but such repairs would be a downtime activity (requiring at least a day) instead of an exploration activity which is valid for merely Broken items. The goal being to fix, in general, the disproportionate damage that players (and only players) suffer when items are completely destroyed instead of just broken. Maybe there could be an associated gold cost as well... but more of a fee, than a need to replace the item entirely.
I think this would be a pretty good addition to the rules in general.
I believe that on addition to players apparently just not liking it much, a core design issue was that it didn't allow for a shield to be destroyed outright under any circumstances, regardless of how much damage was taken - which was determined to not be undesirable.
If I were going to go full houserule on this subject, which I generally don't, I personally think I'd change the "Destroyed" state of items (not just shields) to ultimately be repairable - but such repairs would be a downtime activity (requiring at least a day) instead of an exploration activity which is valid for merely Broken items. The goal being to fix, in general, the disproportionate damage that players (and only players) suffer when items are completely destroyed instead of just broken. Maybe there could be an associated...
The bit I bolded would be a feature for me/my table vice a flaw.
Just changing the destroyed state to a more severe type of broken doesn't really fix one of the main issues I have (scalability). It was the same issue I had with just removing the Break Threshold and 0 hp being broken (which has a similar type of rolldown to some of the blocking shields as the original house rule I linked to that kicked this whole thing off).
I believe that on addition to players apparently just not liking it much, a core design issue was that it didn't allow for a shield to be destroyed outright under any circumstances, regardless of how much damage was taken - which was determined to not be undesirable.
If I were going to go full houserule on this subject, which I generally don't, I personally think I'd change the "Destroyed" state of items (not just shields) to ultimately be repairable - but such repairs would be a downtime activity (requiring at least a day) instead of an exploration activity which is valid for merely Broken items. The goal being to fix, in general, the disproportionate damage that players (and only players) suffer when items are completely destroyed instead of just broken. Maybe there could be an associated...
The bit I bolded would be a feature for me/my table vice a flaw.
Just changing the destroyed state to a more severe type of broken doesn't really fix one of the main issues I have (scalability). It was the same issue I had with just removing the Break Threshold and 0 hp being broken (which has a similar type of rolldown to some of the blocking shields as the original house rule I linked to that kicked this whole thing off).
I suppose I dont really get the issue with scalability. Its pretty common for items - specifically weapons and armor - to have to be functionally replaced (even upgrading a given item to the next tier of effectiveness, ie going from striking to greater striking, is functionally the cost of entirely new item) in order to remain "viable" relative to the expectations of the game.
Why shouldn't Shield Blocking require an ongoing investment in a new shield, ideologically, to remain a viable option?
Is it just that its only the Blocking element that doesn't scale, since things like the Spellguard shield do scale since its +2 to saves is equally valuable at all levels of play - where its ability to Block does not?
It seems pretty clear to me that for items like the Spellguard Shield, its only allowed to block because it is, in fact, a Steel Shield in addition to its other properties - NOT because you are intended to Block with it regularly. Blocking with it is essentially a flavorful perk in addition to the save bonus and not real functionality.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You keep using the one shield that matches your argument really well and keep forgetting that other shields exist.
Like the Forge Warden. Or Arrow Catching.
Both of which are designed to be blocked with yet can't take a hit any better than Spellguard.
Or any of the special material shields. Why is Adamantine so bad at blocking? What benefit does it give?
You keep using the one shield that matches your argument really well and keep forgetting that other shields exist.
Like the Forge Warden. Or Arrow Catching.
Both of which are designed to be blocked with yet can't take a hit any better than Spellguard.
Pre-Errata, maybe. Neither of these shields is in danger of being destroyed by anything short of a crit, at any level - and both have superior hardness to the Spellguard shield to boot.
This complaint is obsolete.
Special Material shields remain the primary outlier, and I still have the suspicion they were included so that GM's could answer the question "What are the stats on an Adamantine Shield, and what does it cost?" more than it was for them to be usable... which is a shame, but I don't see any other explanation that explains their complete lack of usability.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pre-Errata, maybe. Neither of these shields is in danger of being destroyed by anything short of a crit, at any level - and both have superior hardness to the Spellguard shield to boot.
Ok, yes, they did get a boost with the errata.
But that still leaves the Jawbreaker Shield (60 hp+hardness), Dragonslayer's Shield (58 hp+hardness+elemental), and the Nethysian Bulwark (50 hp+hardness) which are equal to or worse than a fully refreshed Spined Shield (60 hp+hardness+spines) despite being double (or better) its level.
The Exploding Shield is also Bad At Blocking and You Block With It, but its supposed to be destroyed, so...whatever. Its also dirt cheap.
Pre-Errata, maybe. Neither of these shields is in danger of being destroyed by anything short of a crit, at any level - and both have superior hardness to the Spellguard shield to boot.Ok, yes, they did get a boost with the errata.
But that still leaves the Jawbreaker Shield (60 hp+hardness), Dragonslayer's Shield (58 hp+hardness+elemental), and the Nethysian Bulwark (50 hp+hardness) which are equal to or worse than a fully refreshed Spined Shield (60 hp+hardness+spines) despite being double (or better) its level.
The Exploding Shield is also Bad At Blocking and You Block With It, but its supposed to be destroyed, so...whatever. Its also dirt cheap.
Nethysian Bulwark thrives on being broken in a single blow, without being Destroyed. Its stats are ideal for that, tuned for that even, and it isn't destroyed by average (High) Strike damage from anything below level 23 - and even level 23 and 24 things will reliably skew below the 50 damage needed to destroy it outright.
The Jawbreaker has plenty of utility to go along with its serviceable defensive stats. I'm not sure what the issue is with it - its not a Sturdy shield, but it has some flavorful abilities that aren't awful. Its not something you really go out and buy in most campaigns - but its absolutely worth using if you find it (which is probably why its Uncommon).
Dragonslayer's shield blocks elemental damage - which is unique utility in addition to its helpful bonus to will saves vs. dragons.
|
My tentative houserule is to add the following runes to the game
Shield Hardness - Adds 1/2/3 Hardness, level 2/10/16, same cost as weapon potency.
Shield Sturdiness - Adds 30/60/90 HP, level 4/12/19, same cost as weapon striking
This still provides a tradeoff with specific shields, which you now can scale up to be good at blocking, it will just cost a lot. With these runes, precious material shields (adamantine/orichalcum) becomes the default for blocking, but specific shields you might like aren’t left behind if you want to block.
If using ABP, put these abilities at the same level as weapon potency/devastating strikes.
It sounds like you should definitely be using ABP if you don’t like everything being on sale, though, because most items in PF2e are essential math enhancers that the designers expected you to get at certain levels. Trying to restrict loot in such a system is almost guaranteed to lead to some wonkiness, particularly regarding shields which it seems they expected you to upgrade to sturdy at 1-3 levels above the level at which the sturdy shield is available to continue being able to block effectively with it.
That being said, shield blocking is definitely very effective if invested in. I had a champion player through book 1 and 2 AoA as well, and they soaked hits like a sponge. Can’t say the same for the rest of the party though...
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I do use the ABP for Striking and Resiliency runes and crafting quality for Potency.
Krispy, the reason I have an issue is that shields DONT scale. Except sturdy. And Medusa's Scream for some reason. When you get them, they can block x attacks. That's core to their function. In a handful of levels they can no longer do that reliably (or at all in many cases), but there are no improved versions of that shield. Not to make it better, or even as good as, the Sturdy Shield, but just to keep part of the function of the shield relevant.
Yes, weapons and armor can/have to be upgraded, but you can literally use the weapon you start the game with from levels 1-20 and keep its designed functionality all the way through, PLUS add some wangy shite to customize it further (property runes). You have no such options with shields.
Using the version of the dent system I proposed is essentially using the ABP system to give shields the perfect amount of hp every level to remain exactly as useful as when you get them. It doesn't even make the higher level versions of sturdy shield obsolete as they get hardness increases. Does it have its own flaws - absolutely. I haven't played with the rule at all, and won't for a while since we're so close to the end of the current campaign using the old rule, so it may fall completely flat when exposed to the table, but right now it's the solution that solves half my problem with the games schizophrenic view of shield blocking (ie, read class entries and get told "get a shield, take these feats, you're gonna be able to block a lot" then get to treasure section and it's "okay, we oversold it. You can block a bit with this one shield and a couple others for a few levels"). The other half (being primarily funneled towards Sturdy if you take shield block feats) is partially addressed by it since the middle tier shields remain middle tier, but is really reliant on Paizo bringing out more options. Which they will since we're only in what? Year 2 of PF2e? Hell, they'll probably release something (or enough something's) that makes my issues moot in a year or two (like they did with the ABP in the APG).
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I do use the ABP for Striking and Resiliency runes and crafting quality for Potency.
Krispy, the reason I have an issue is that shields DONT scale. Except sturdy. And Medusa's Scream for some reason. When you get them, they can block x attacks. That's core to their function. In a handful of levels they can no longer do that reliably (or at all in many cases), but there are no improved versions of that shield. Not to make it better, or even as good as, the Sturdy Shield, but just to keep part of the function of the shield relevant.
Yes, weapons and armor can/have to be upgraded, but you can literally use the weapon you start the game with from levels 1-20 and keep its designed functionality all the way through, PLUS add some wangy s#+#e to customize it further (property runes). You have no such options with shields.
I can but fave this once, alas!
It's worth noting that none of the magic shields in the playtest had extra abilities so potent that their ability to block had to be sacrificed to keep things fair. If a mundane shield had X ability to block, then a magic shield (any magic shield, including Spellguard) had X ability to block plus its magic effect. Ergo, blocking was not some niche activity warranting a limit in the blocker's choice of viable shields but indeed core to the function of every shield.
People didn't like dents IIRC for two reasons, the poor explanation for how it worked (mentioned above) and the way that even a mundane shield could survive at least one hit no matter what (since they could only take two dents from one attack and needed three to be broken. I.e., a 1st-level Fighter with a simple wooden shield could get hit by the Tarrasque and his shield would survive.
Thing is, there's a wide spectrum between "it takes freaking Saitama to destroy even a regular shield in one punch" and "an on-level bad guy can forcefully blink his eyelids in the general direction of a shield and it'll snap in two". There was middle ground; too bad we didn't go there.
I added this feat to my game. My players have yet to reach a level where they can take this, so I have no idea how well it would work in action. There is a fighter in the party, but he seems to be focused on 1- or 2-handed weapons, as well as reach, so he may not go for it.
Durable Shield
Champion 8, Fighter 8
Add your armor proficiency level to your shield’s hardness (+2 for Trained, +4 for Expert, +6 for Master, +8 for Legendary). Your shield’s HP and BT are not changed. This stacks with Shield Ally.