I don't think that "It's cheap" Is a great class design, like, if i want to be a shield guy i wanna spend on a shield.
Also labbing out the shield hps i kinda realized that without that boost they're pathetically low, like, i'm THE shield guy and i can barely block three strikes.
Thirdly you also cannot "cheese" this problem with the viking archetype, rule wise second shield doesn't work as you Need to prepare the blessing in a specific shield.
ALSO you don't even save cash! If you do the math the previous thing made lower tier runes Better than current ones (example: a level 4 sturdy shield with shield ally Is Better than current level 10 sturdy shield!)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like it just fine. You get reliable access to a shield that you can use for blocking, no matter what loot drops or what shops or crafting are available. That extra point of hardness on an already Sturdy shield is gravy.
Also, blocking three strikes in a battle covers most battles, no? Not only is that a decent amount of damage mitigated, you also have your main class feature competing for the same reaction resource.
Anyway, looks like a matter of taste to me.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The old one had to be reined in because it got absolutely out of hand at high level. Things like blocking 300 damage in a single fight (actual number, I tracked it). You could block absolutely bonkers amount of damage with an appropriate Sturdy Shield and the Shield Ally, and that was without using things like Legendary Crafting + Quick Repair to make it a 1 action repair, or Mending Lattice (if you could get access to it).
The new one is still quite good as hardness makes a huge difference, it lets you use other kinds of shields and have them work, and you get access to some great party defense abilities.
I think they made the right call on this.
I find it kinda interesting. I was looking at it for unrelated reasons just yesterday.
If you buy a Sturdy Shield and upgrade it to L10, the Shield Ally ability will keep it just as good as a fully upgraded Sturdy Shield. Not bad.
If you were planning on investing in your Sturdy Shield, +1 hardness is always welcome.
Finally, if you liked some of the specialty shields, the Ally lets you make it a decent blocker (not quite as good as a Sturdy Shield) for free. Nice.
I like it just fine. You get reliable access to a shield that you can use for blocking, no matter what loot drops or what shops or crafting are available. That extra point of hardness on an already Sturdy shield is gravy.
Also, blocking three strikes in a battle covers most battles, no? Not only is that a decent amount of damage mitigated, you also have your main class feature competing for the same reaction resource.
Anyway, looks like a matter of taste to me.
In my opinion It really doesn't, a champion with shield of reckoning and reactive shield should AT LEAST use two shields blocks every turn, and if you're not using viking's second shield then you're not gonna last more than three rounds.
Also, +1 hardness Is... Pathetically useless, with all due respect It could've been taken out completely
This thread got me thinking about playing an ancient elf champ to get cleric dedication and emblazoned armaments for the status bonus to hardness by level 4. That would make the hardness on that level 4 sturdy shield as good as a normal level 7 sturdy shield. In fact this would keep you either on par or 1 under the hardness of the next stage of sturdy shield as you level.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like it just fine. You get reliable access to a shield that you can use for blocking, no matter what loot drops or what shops or crafting are available. That extra point of hardness on an already Sturdy shield is gravy.
Also, blocking three strikes in a battle covers most battles, no? Not only is that a decent amount of damage mitigated, you also have your main class feature competing for the same reaction resource.
Anyway, looks like a matter of taste to me.
In my opinion It really doesn't, a champion with shield of reckoning and reactive shield should AT LEAST use two shields blocks every turn, and if you're not using viking's second shield then you're not gonna last more than three rounds.
Also, +1 hardness Is... Pathetically useless, with all due respect It could've been taken out completely
while I have also mixed feelings towards the new shield ally, this looks a loot like whiteroom mathematics
I doubt that even half the players get the chance for two shieldblocks per turnand the extra hardness, while not much, still is useful, pathfinder is famour for a single point making a difference
also you seem to assume that every player blocks every strike at the maximum damage, while there are players out there who pace their shield blocks for critical moments and against strikes that do little to no damage against the shield
then again, with your last answer it feels also like your opinion is set in stone and you are going to ignore most, if not all, of the arguments presented here
I like it just fine. You get reliable access to a shield that you can use for blocking, no matter what loot drops or what shops or crafting are available. That extra point of hardness on an already Sturdy shield is gravy.
Also, blocking three strikes in a battle covers most battles, no? Not only is that a decent amount of damage mitigated, you also have your main class feature competing for the same reaction resource.
Anyway, looks like a matter of taste to me.
In my opinion It really doesn't, a champion with shield of reckoning and reactive shield should AT LEAST use two shields blocks every turn, and if you're not using viking's second shield then you're not gonna last more than three rounds.
Also, +1 hardness Is... Pathetically useless, with all due respect It could've been taken out completely
I guess the value of that hardness increase depends on the damage your taking at each level and how many hits till it breaks and finally how much damage mitigation do you need based on your HP at that level.
Take the high damage average from the GM Core strike damage table for comparison.I put level - high average damage - shield Hardness - shield BT - # attacks till break against high average damage (BT/ (Creature high average damage-hardness)) - PC HP - damage reduced by shield if used till it breaks against high average damage.
Shield stats include Shield ally and sturdy shield for the level. PC HP is champ human with +2 starting Con to +3 at level 5 +4 at level 10 and toughness taken at level 3.
-1 - 03 - 05 - 10 - NoBr - 020 - NA no shield ally yet
00 - 05 - 05 - 10 - NoBr - 020 - NA no shield ally yet
01 - 06 - 05 - 10 - 10.0 - 020 - 50 no shield ally yet
02 - 09 - 05 - 10 - 02.5 - 032 - 15 no shield ally yet
03 - 12 - 08 - 32 - 08.0 - 047 - 64 regular steel with shield ally
04 - 14 - 09 - 32 - 06.4 - 060 - 63 sturdy (minor)
05 - 16 - 09 - 32 - 04.5 - 078 - 45 sturdy (minor)
06 - 18 - 09 - 32 - 03.5 - 092 - 36 sturdy (minor)
07 - 20 - 11 - 40 - 04.4 - 106 - 55 sturdy (lesser)
08 - 22 - 11 - 40 - 03.6 - 120 - 44 sturdy (lesser)
09 - 24 - 11 - 40 - 03.1 - 134 - 44 sturdy (lesser)
10 - 26 - 14 - 52 - 04.3 - 158 - 70 Sturdy (Moderate)
11 - 28 - 14 - 52 - 03.7 - 173 - 56 Sturdy (Moderate)
12 - 30 - 14 - 52 - 03.2 - 188 - 56 Sturdy (Moderate)
13 - 32 - 16 - 60 - 03.7 - 203 - 64 Sturdy (Greater)
I rounded up to the nearest 10ths place since any value past the decimal means one more hit than the number preceding the decimal causes break.
Given that actual play is going to vary hits till break by the damage range in the high damage category and across categories with shields lasting longer for anything in a lower damage category and break in fewer hits for extreme damage creatures.
Shields are kinda amazing at level 1 for those with shield block, with level 2 and 3 being a pain point. Level 3 with shield blessing is a huge benefit.
One thing to consider past level 3. The +1 hardness is more important when it allows for more blocks before breaking which is not shown above.
For example level 4 above says the shield will stop 60 damage from 7 strikes by the time it breaks. Using a sturdy shield (minor) without shield blessing changes it to only stopping 48 damage from 6 strikes and then being unusable and having lower AC for a 7th strike.
The assumption above is only for strikes you actually can shield block so there likely is more damage happening in between the ones blocked.
The previous one was strong and good, but also kinda pigeon-holed you towards Sturdy Shields or a select few specific shields with good base numbers.
They new version gives versatility and adaptability (finding new shields mid-adventuring and no time to visit a settlement). Not only that, but besides being "cheaper", it's also "faster". You can guarantee you have the best shield available every level while also prioritizing the mandatory runes.
Also, above all, it mitigates the loss of not using a Sturdy Shield, in favor of something more interesting and potentially fun.
[
while I have also mixed feelings towards the new shield ally, this looks a loot like whiteroom mathematics
I doubt that even half the players get the chance for two shieldblocks per turn
and the extra hardness, while not much, still is useful, pathfinder is famour for a single point making a difference
also you seem to assume that every player blocks every strike at the maximum damage, while there are players out there who pace their shield blocks for critical moments and against strikes that do little to no damage against the shieldthen again, with your last answer it feels also like your opinion is set in stone and you are going to ignore most, if not all, of the arguments presented here
My opinion Isn't really set in Stone for magical reasons, my opinion Is based on arguments that Haven't been really addressed not by your nor anyone.
-"oh but you'll have more shields to choose from" problem Is most shields are terrible, spellbound Is decent only for a while and then requires me to spend on reinforcing runes to keep It up since shield blessing only gives the appropriate level runes, which doesn't max out my shield, same thing for fortress and clockwork.
-"oh but you'll save so much Money" which you Will not, because since you're forced to have backup shields you'll have to put lower level reinforcing runes on them because Just the shield blessing doesn't automatically maximize them.
-"you'll never shield block twice per turn that's absurd" reflexive shield+shield of reckoning. The most BASIC thing every shield champions gets and that lets you do that twice per turn, you can't Just ignore that.
-"oh but every +1 Number counts" It doesn't. A +1 to hit Is a +5/10% damage based on the Attack roll not a flat +1, every flat +1 Is basically useless and you can't compare them, especially since that +1 Will cost you loads of golds (which, AGAIN destroys the purpouse of the shield ally change)
-"why should you block every strike, you should use them on less damaging strikes" while it's common knowledge that you don't shield block crite you can't fix a weak shield by using It less, because less blocks you use more damage you take and since your whole usefullness as a class Is defined by damage mitigation you're gonna significantly weaker.
I don't have my mind set in Stone for dumb reasons, but for some debateable ones
I like it just fine. You get reliable access to a shield that you can use for blocking, no matter what loot drops or what shops or crafting are available. That extra point of hardness on an already Sturdy shield is gravy.
Also, blocking three strikes in a battle covers most battles, no? Not only is that a decent amount of damage mitigated, you also have your main class feature competing for the same reaction resource.
Anyway, looks like a matter of taste to me.
In my opinion It really doesn't, a champion with shield of reckoning and reactive shield should AT LEAST use two shields blocks every turn, and if you're not using viking's second shield then you're not gonna last more than three rounds.
Also, +1 hardness Is... Pathetically useless, with all due respect It could've been taken out completely
I guess the value of that hardness increase depends on the damage your taking at each level and how many hits till it breaks and finally how much damage mitigation do you need based on your HP at that level.
Take the high damage average from the GM Core strike damage table for comparison.
I put level - high average damage - shield Hardness - shield BT - # attacks till break against high average damage (BT/ (Creature high average damage-hardness)) - PC HP - damage reduced by shield if used till it breaks against high average damage.
Shield stats include Shield ally and sturdy shield for the level. PC HP is champ human with +2 starting Con to +3 at level 5 +4 at level 10 and toughness taken at level 3.
-1 - 03 - 05 - 10 - NoBr - 020 - NA no shield ally yet
00 - 05 - 05 - 10 - NoBr - 020 - NA no shield ally yet
01 - 06 - 05 - 10 - 10.0 - 020 - 50 no shield ally yet
02 - 09 - 05 - 10 - 02.5 - 032 - 15 no shield ally yet
03 - 12 - 08 - 32 - 08.0 - 047 - 64 regular steel with shield ally
04 - 14 - 09 - 32 - 06.4 - 060 - 63 sturdy (minor)
05 - 16 - 09 - 32 - 04.5 - 078 - 45 sturdy (minor)
06 - 18 - 09 - 32...
Seen these calculations, would you agree with me that shields break excedingly fast especially at higher levels? Isn't It absurd that my shield can barely last Two turns if i actually use It?
-"oh but you'll have more shields to choose from" problem Is most shields are terrible, spellbound Is decent only for a while and then requires me to spend on reinforcing runes to keep It up since shield blessing only gives the appropriate level runes, which doesn't max out my shield, same thing for fortress and clockwork.[
while I have also mixed feelings towards the new shield ally, this looks a loot like whiteroom mathematics
I doubt that even half the players get the chance for two shieldblocks per turn
and the extra hardness, while not much, still is useful, pathfinder is famour for a single point making a difference
also you seem to assume that every player blocks every strike at the maximum damage, while there are players out there who pace their shield blocks for critical moments and against strikes that do little to no damage against the shieldthen again, with your last answer it feels also like your opinion is set in stone and you are going to ignore most, if not all, of the arguments presented here
I'm somewhat confused by this statement, why would you need to spend on runes when it's already giving you runes of the appropriate level? Unless you mean to get the +1 Hardness bonus for already having the highest rune?
-"you'll never shield block twice per turn that's absurd" reflexive shield+shield of reckoning. The most BASIC thing every shield champions gets and that lets you do that twice per turn, you can't Just ignore that.
Shield of Reckoning also has the Champion's Reaction Resistance applied before the Shield Block, which drastically reduces the amount of damage the shield is taking (though you'll find some people argue otherwise).
This stacks up to massive amounts of damage mitigation and keeps the shield in pretty good shape for multiple hits unless you're blocking multiple critical hits. In that case, yeah, the shield will break fast, and that's just how the game works.
But it's pretty easy for a high level Champion to use Shield of Reckoning twice every turn and keep their shield going for multiple rounds. It's going to eventually break and that's also by design: the game does not want you able to shield block every attack for an entire combat without going out of your way to do it (like Legendary Quick Repair).
That's not a Shield Ally issue: that's how shields are designed in PF2. No one can block with a shield 3 times a round for 3 rounds without their shield breaking, but Champions using Shield of Reckoning can block a LOT of damage before that happens. It's a very good feature at what it's intended to do: let allies stay standing longer.
I'm somewhat confused by this statement, why would you need to spend on runes when it's already giving you runes of the appropriate level? Unless you mean to get the +1 Hardness bonus for already having the highest rune?-"oh but you'll have more shields to choose from" problem Is most shields are terrible, spellbound Is decent only for a while and then requires me to spend on reinforcing runes to keep It up since shield blessing only gives the appropriate level runes, which doesn't max out my shield, same thing for fortress and clockwork.[
while I have also mixed feelings towards the new shield ally, this looks a loot like whiteroom mathematics
I doubt that even half the players get the chance for two shieldblocks per turn
and the extra hardness, while not much, still is useful, pathfinder is famour for a single point making a difference
also you seem to assume that every player blocks every strike at the maximum damage, while there are players out there who pace their shield blocks for critical moments and against strikes that do little to no damage against the shieldthen again, with your last answer it feels also like your opinion is set in stone and you are going to ignore most, if not all, of the arguments presented here
Because It doesn't really do that, since It gives you ONLY the rune appropriate for the level your shield won't have the maxed out stats. You Need lower level runes anyway (this Is how It's written, i Hope i'm wrong)
Because It doesn't really do that, since It gives you ONLY the rune appropriate for the level your shield won't have the maxed out stats. You Need lower level runes anyway (this Is how It's written, i Hope i'm wrong)
I'm not perfectly fluent in all the rules, so someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but reinforcing runes are fundamental runes and those simply get replaced/upgraded as they increase, you don't put previous runes on. Unless reinforcing runes are different in some way that I'm unaware of.
I'm not perfectly fluent in all the rules, so someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but reinforcing runes are fundamental runes and those simply get replaced/upgraded as they increase, you don't put previous runes on. Unless reinforcing runes are different in some way that I'm unaware of.Because It doesn't really do that, since It gives you ONLY the rune appropriate for the level your shield won't have the maxed out stats. You Need lower level runes anyway (this Is how It's written, i Hope i'm wrong)
That Is, i think, the problem. You're still required to buy shield because the rune on its own doesn't get you a shield as strong as a sturdy One (aka, the bare minimum).
One Major point of this ability Is to save cash, and It fails in that too lol.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not perfectly fluent in all the rules, so someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but reinforcing runes are fundamental runes and those simply get replaced/upgraded as they increase, you don't put previous runes on. Unless reinforcing runes are different in some way that I'm unaware of.Because It doesn't really do that, since It gives you ONLY the rune appropriate for the level your shield won't have the maxed out stats. You Need lower level runes anyway (this Is how It's written, i Hope i'm wrong)
That Is, i think, the problem. You're still required to buy shield because the rune on its own doesn't get you a shield as strong as a sturdy One (aka, the bare minimum).
One Major point of this ability Is to save cash, and It fails in that too lol.
I'm becoming increasingly confused. It saves you the entire amount you'd spend on a rune for your shield, which i believe tops out at 32k GP at 19th level. Which lets you use that on any other equipment or even, as mentioned, a second shield to add more longevity to blocking by having a backup. And a sturdy shield isn't bare minimum, it's just the highest amount of blocking power, the runes bridge the gap for other shields with unique effects to still be useful while not making the sturdy shield obsolete.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seen these calculations, would you agree with me that shields break excedingly fast especially at higher levels? Isn't It absurd that my shield can barely last Two turns if i actually use It?
One thing about shields in this game is they just are not going to stop more damage than their hardness in a single block. So they really stop the most damage possible when you get more blocks in and that only happens when you block lower damage rolls from enemies and take the full hit from higher damage rolls and crits. That is counter intuitive and might take some people out of the role playing aspect of the game.
In your experience when you lose a shield that fast, like in 2 hits, are you facing higher level creatures and/or blocking incoming crits?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Most combats are like 2-4 rounds and you can repair your shield to full after combat so 2-3 uses doesn't even really seem that bad tbh.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most combats are like 2-4 rounds and you can repair your shield to full after combat so 2-3 uses doesn't even really seem that bad tbh.
And in practice, you won't even use Shield Block every round.
With my champion, I only broke my shield when I was fighting a boss that ended up landing many critical hits during the fight.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also shields rarely broken unless you frequently try to block critical damages with them (what usually doesn't worth unless is to avoid to become immediately unconscious). So if you repair your shield between every battle (just need some minutes specially if you have Quick Repair) you probably will have your shield ready to be used. Also once that Shield Ally allows to turn every shield almost like a Sturdy Shield you can simply swap your shields.
What it looks like with either shield blessing or with emblazoned armaments is they net you more blocks before breaking on average.
So stopping +1 damage from a single attack isnt amazing at first glance but when it means the shield takes more hits to break its actually pretty strong at letting you do what shields in this game are designed to do.
Folks, what i meant by what i said before Is that the "highest reinforcing rune for your level" doesn't Bring a steel shield on par with a sturdy of the appropriate level (which Is basically the bare minimum for ANY shield really).
It means that, practically, now you're not really saving that much cash, Just buying useless specific magic shields (there are literally THREE good ones ability wise: spellbound, clockwork, indestructible) because otherwise a normal steel shield with your blessing Will not be worth Two pennies if you're above level 7
Also shields rarely broken unless you frequently try to block critical damages with them (what usually doesn't worth unless is to avoid to become immediately unconscious). So if you repair your shield between every battle (just need some minutes specially if you have Quick Repair) you probably will have your shield ready to be used. Also once that Shield Ally allows to turn every shield almost like a Sturdy Shield you can simply swap your shields.
On most level, a fella here did the calculations above, shields break with four non-crit hits. Four shield blocks, for a Quick shield block champion that's ideally two turns
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yet it isn't what happens in practice.
Not all enemies only does Strikes, not all enemies' attacks those who wear shield, not all enemies' Strike hits (specially those who have +2/+3 circumstance AC bonus), not all enemies' damages are physical (or physical only), not all enemies' focus are on the same single shielded PC, not all Strikes can be blocked and enemies Strikes doesn't progress in same rate that shield hardness and HP increases.
Most encounters specially those who are low levels ends in 3-4 turns and the initial levels you have a lower number of reactions to use with shield block (specially if you already used it with champion's reaction).
In practice in all my games in PF2e since 2019 both legacy and remaster ruled I very rarely saw shields breaking and in most case that I saw usually was a player trying to block a large amount of damage, usually critical hits and in all cases they done this knowing that they will repair a shield pretty fast.
Even if the shield only blocks 4 hits this is already a pretty strong defensive power specially if we also consider other resistances. As GM as saw shields even trivializing enemies pretty easier and being way more effective than any healing. I simply cannot agree with this whitepaper consideration because they doesn't reflected the reality of my games.
The another curious point that Shield Block was originally developed to only block 2-3 hits during playtest. They only becomes stronger because the designers thought that the old dent system for objectes was overcomplicated and choose to switch to a more simply system of BT and improved the shields endurance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I never understood the logic that dents were more complicated than tracking the 32 HP of shield and having to apply the same damage to the shield and its wielder while reducing both by the hardness of the shield. You get 2 shield blocks a combat was so much simpler, and IIRC there was no real risk of your shield being permanently destroyed so you could block those big dramatic crits.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder what kind of enemies OP has to fight that they consistently seem to have their shields with maxed runes breaking quick enough to validate backup shield with a full rune on it
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am remembering discussion about the dent system as people not liking the simplicity of the "if you block a hit you get a dent, if you already had a dent your shield is busted" being spoiled by "...but some shields can actually handle more dents", alongside people complaining that the amount of damage didn't really matter.
So at the time of swapping to an HP-based system that changed made sense as a solution given people are already familiar with HP representing the ability to last through greater damage and it makes the amount of damage matter more explicitly
Sounds about right. HP is already a thing people are used to, so "your shield can take X damage" is a system people are familiar with. That doesn't mean its necessarily the best system for shields (since now we have "blocking crits is worse than blocking small hits in terms of the total damage you can block before your shield breaks), but the dent system definitely was something some folks didn't care for.
(though now people complain in a way that, to me, sounds a lot like they'd only be actually happy if shields couldn't break at all or could guarantee complete negation of an attack or two per combat)
To be fair: if your character is built around shield blocking, running out of shield block can feel lousy. It's like playing an archer and running out of arrows except its much easier to carry piles of arrows.
It's coming from a place of "I can do this cool thing that is fun to use and then my shield breaks and I can't do the cool thing anymore." And yeah: being able to do the cool thing is more fun than not being able to do the cool thing.
There's good reasons balance wise why shields don't have infinite blocking potential and I agree with them, but I get where folks are coming from.
I never understood the logic that dents were more complicated than tracking the 32 HP of shield and having to apply the same damage to the shield and its wielder while reducing both by the hardness of the shield. You get 2 shield blocks a combat was so much simpler, and IIRC there was no real risk of your shield being permanently destroyed so you could block those big dramatic crits.From what I remember, People hated dents because it effectively meant that your steel shield was broken if it took two 6 damage hits. Didnt matter blocked 6 damage or 60, It was still a dent. Instead of being punished for blocking heavy hits you were punished for blocking small hits.
It was also rather poorly written and people didnt play it 'as intended'.
Notice that shields was only part of the problem because it was a general rule for objects. So no matter if you was just kicking or throwing a nuke it was only get dent 1. Later they added if you does more damage than hardness the dent increases by the number of multiply you made (for example a 10 dmg vs a hardness 5 would make a dent 2).
But in final version the designers just decide to rollback to the old HP/BT system instead of create an condition exclusive to objects and all rules and exceptions around it.
In the end the shield endurance wasn't the main reason to switch. The designers always just thought that a shield being able to only blocks only few times per encounter was fine since the very beginning.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
'Ideally'? You're a champion with your shield raised, what the heck are you fighting that even if everything is attacking you you're consistently getting hit twice per turn by on-level attacks? And are you never using your other reaction for, like, your Champion reaction? You also have Lay on Hands and a good HP pool, you can facetank and heal damage if your shield is close to breaking. And if you took some of the specialty shields, their abilities could have saved you from getting hit.
On most level, a fella here did the calculations above, shields break with four non-crit hits. Four shield blocks, for a Quick shield block champion that's ideally two turns
Note they also want to be using effects like Shield Warden or Shield of Reckoning to also be shield blocking for their allies, contributing to all of these blocks per turn. It feels like they want to be playing as a tank in an MMO intervening for any attacks against the party, which is frankly an excessive expectation if so.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Currently playing a 3rd level Champion and never played the pre-master Champion. Level 3 made my shield feel insanely good. My steel shield has more HP than I do! I am not sure I've seen a hit that could even break my shield yet. Hardness 8 and 32 BT means I need a 41 damage hit. I've taken a few hits in the low 30s but they weren't blockable due to being energy damage. Obviously later the math works out but currently breaking my shield just isn't a likely occurrence.
Obviously, the pre-master Shield Ally is more effective if investing into a shield, but I kind of like being encouraged to go for something else. Personally I am considering Doubling Rings with a Shield Augmentation for Shove and Trip. Which still leaves another 25 gp over a Rune for other interesting items.
...on par with a sturdy of the appropriate level (which Is basically the bare minimum for ANY shield really).When you're looking at what the team designing the game have decided is the absolute best-in-class benefit for something as being "basically the bare minimum" the issue is one of personal perception, not the actual function of the game elements.
You're basically setting yourself up for disappointment by default by having tricked yourself into thinking a massive bonus a character can get is actually something that only gets you to the baseline so anything less is "subpar" even though that's not really true.
In my experience this kind of skewed perception is a common byproduct of people that are trying to play the game with high-difficulty challenges yet have overlooked the effect of the arms race aspect of that proposition so instead of the challenges being set to a difficulty and kept there even if the players make choices that will help them overcome that difficulty the challenges are being set up to be particularly hard even after making the useful choices - resulting in the false appearance that if the characters weren't built so strongly they would fail and die, when the actual case is that the GM just doesn't need to actually push the difficulty to that point in the first place for players to feel reasonably challenged. And if they did do that, the players might not come away from the experience so sure that if they don't have sturdy shield levels of shield blocking they are missing something important.
The point that you May not understand Is that in a game such as pathfinder 2e since, mathematically wise, your power level Is STRICTLY controlled by level progression (unlike previous editions) when we speak about numbers the best you can get Is usually (and in case It Is) the literal bare minimum. Are you saying that a shield lasting three shield blocks when i can do It twice per turn on myself or an ally Is "the best there Is and actually super strong" hell no It Isn't. This Is the same reason why everyone only used sturdy shields pre-remastered, everything was too frail to ever be useful otherwise and same thing applies here, every shield that doesn't match a sturdy IS too frail to do anything and i have, thanks to the guy above, the math to prove It.
I wouldn't care about all of this if i played in a homebrew game with an expert game Master, but since both of those things aren't true (playing extinction curse with a new GM) i have to punch above my Weight since paizo's writers can't for the Life of them design a normal AP, cherry on top we also have a newish player that decided to play a summoner and, with all due respect for him since he's new, doesn't have any idea on how to play One, i'd rather play the most boring and optimized champion that has no tiè to its backstory mechanically wise than have a new player cycle through characters because "single +2/3 enemy" Is the only thing that paizo published until 2022. (Btw, i'm not english so i don't know if i sound mean or anything, i don't know how to exactly moderate my tone when i write in english)
If you're curious about how i came to this conclusion i Simply followed the lessons that abomination vault taught me
To be fair: if your character is built around shield blocking, running out of shield block can feel lousy. It's like playing an archer and running out of arrows except its much easier to carry piles of arrows.
I don't really like this analogy because between the two only one of them is a proactive way to engage with the enemies in combat. So it's not really like running out of arrows at all. It's more like a character with Reactive Strike having a fight where characters don't provoke very often.
I don't really like this analogy because between the two only one of them is a proactive way to engage with the enemies in combat. So it's not really like running out of arrows at all. It's more like a character with Reactive Strike having a fight where characters don't provoke very often.
To be fair: if your character is built around shield blocking, running out of shield block can feel lousy. It's like playing an archer and running out of arrows except its much easier to carry piles of arrows.
i don't think something being proactive Is inherently Better than something being reactive
That's not the point, the point is that people are expected to make more proactive than reactive actions and the distribution of actions, accessibility of consumables etc. reflect that. Shield Block is reactive, hence it is balanced around doing its thing less frequently.i don't think something being proactive Is inherently Better than something being reactiveI don't really like this analogy because between the two only one of them is a proactive way to engage with the enemies in combat. So it's not really like running out of arrows at all. It's more like a character with Reactive Strike having a fight where characters don't provoke very often.
My point Is that It doesn't really make sense since champion Is an inherently reactive class.
Actively they can't do anything of value, a good 50% of their pressure Is applied outside of their turn and purely by existing with High AC| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't really like this analogy because between the two only one of them is a proactive way to engage with the enemies in combat. So it's not really like running out of arrows at all. It's more like a character with Reactive Strike having a fight where characters don't provoke very often.
To be fair: if your character is built around shield blocking, running out of shield block can feel lousy. It's like playing an archer and running out of arrows except its much easier to carry piles of arrows.
Not really, since you can't run out of Reactive Strikes. Maybe something doesn't trigger them, but that can also happen with Shield Block (if you're being attacked with spells, for example).
This is running out of a resource and not being able to do something anymore. Normal thing for spellcasters, but martials just don't manage consumable resources as often and so it can feel off to someone when it comes up.
Like I said: I agree with the limitations, but I get why it might feel lousy to someone who is running into it a lot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Note they also want to be using effects like Shield Warden or Shield of Reckoning to also be shield blocking for their allies, contributing to all of these blocks per turn. It feels like they want to be playing as a tank in an MMO intervening for any attacks against the party, which is frankly an excessive expectation if so.'Ideally'? You're a champion with your shield raised, what the heck are you fighting that even if everything is attacking you you're consistently getting hit twice per turn by on-level attacks? And are you never using your other reaction for, like, your Champion reaction? You also have Lay on Hands and a good HP pool, you can facetank and heal damage if your shield is close to breaking. And if you took some of the specialty shields, their abilities could have saved you from getting hit.
On most level, a fella here did the calculations above, shields break with four non-crit hits. Four shield blocks, for a Quick shield block champion that's ideally two turns
That's literally what Shield of Reckoning does, though: it enables playing as a MMO tank and intervening when other players get attacked. It doesn't force the creature to attack the Champion, but it makes it actively punishing for them to attack whoever the Champion is protecting by negating massive amounts of damage and getting the extra Champion's Reaction effect. I've seen Shield of Reckoning nullify attacks entirely, it's an awesome ability.
"Playing an MMO tank" is also a large part of the premise of the Guardian class, although the playtest didn't deliver that super well, it was very clear from the design that it wanted to (and Battlecry isn't far off). So this is a playstyle that PF2 wants to enable, it's just not something you can do an infinite number of times since your shield can only take so many hits.
Course, with Shield of Reckoning giving Resistence, you can block more attacks with it than you can with Shield Block. So blocking for your allies is actively encouraged by the design.
So this is a playstyle that PF2 wants to enable, it's just not something you can do an infinite number of times since your shield can only take so many hits.
I should have made myself more clear, because this is correct and the last part what I meant mostly so I appreciate it. There's nothing wrong with aiming to protect and take hits for your allies, especially with Shield of Reckoning, I was trying to refer more the idea that seems to be trying to take nearly every hit as often as they can and expecting to shield block the maximum amount of times every round. Which works great for my Paladin in Final Fantasy strapped with the Aegis shield, less ideal with finite shield resources to manage.