What is the rationale for not allowing magic bracers to work with magic shields?

[Quartz]

I simply don't understand it, so I'm hoping someone can explain it.

You can hold a non-magic shield just fine. You can hold a magic weapon just fine (dual-wielding), so why not a magic shield?

It just seems to me to be an unnecessary and unfair disadvantage. What am I missing?

 

[Crazydwarf]

Well, maybe there isn't one.
Sometimes things like rationality and logic has to give way for game mechanical balance.
There is no real reason other than it conflicts with the rules about magic slots.
Whats the "reason" I cannot pimp out with 8 magical rings really...Same thing.

There is a huge topic on the wizards boards regarding magical bracers + mundane shield. Some say they cannot be combined, most disagree.

 

[Quartz]

There is no real reason other than it conflicts with the rules about magic slots.

Well, absent a good reason, it's going on my list of house rules. I'd be interested to hear what playtesters made of it. Otherwise you give dual-wielders a huge advantage. I mean, what if your second weapon were a Defending weapon? (And yes, I know that's not in 4E. Yet.)

 

[Kzach]

I really don't see a problem here.

Why give power away for free? You're just going to unbalance the system for... what? Because you don't think it's somehow realistic to restrict it? There's a billion and one reasons you could use to justify the mechanic in 'reality', but why bother?

If you want simulationism, find another RPG.

 

[Quartz]

Why give power away for free? You're just going to unbalance the system for... what?

It seems to me that it is the current rule that makes the system unbalanced. Please correct me if I'm mistaken. As I said, there's currently no problem with having a second weapon instead of a shield.

 

[eamon]

It seems to me that it is the current rule that makes the system unbalanced. Please correct me if I'm mistaken. As I said, there's currently no problem with having a second weapon instead of a shield.

Shield users can use as many slots as non-shield users. Both have an arms slot, and both wield one weapon per attack. If you have a second weapon, you're not benefiting from from it directly - it's just more flexible (and a lot more expensive) - there are almost no weapons which grant advantages when you're not actively using them, and I doubt there will be.

The real comparison is two-handed weapon wielders vs. shield+weapon users. Shield users have the advantage of being able to choose a style of enchantment only available to shields. I suspect there may be similar enchantments especially for two-handed weapons, if fewer.

In other words, it's balanced now since both shield users and two-handed weapon users have the same number of slots. Given the items available now, it won't be horribly unbalancing to grant shield users an extra item slot. You are granting them an extra slot, however, and there will be many more magic items before long, including (potentially) interesting shields and bracers - being able to use both enchantments simultaneously will be a power increase.

It won't break your game (almost certainly), but why unbalance it at all?

 

[small pumpkin man]

It seems to me that it is the current rule that makes the system unbalanced. Please correct me if I'm mistaken. As I said, there's currently no problem with having a second weapon instead of a shield.

Okay, take a couple of breaths and think about it, why can characters only wear two magic rings, why can characters not wear a magic cloak and a magic amulet or necklace? Because that's just how the magic item slot system works.

If you want an in world reason, then it's the same as the reason for every other slot restriction, if you want a balance reason, it's because sword and board is already the best choice for those with proficiency, giving them an extra slot is buffing what is already the best option.

 

[Crazydwarf]

But there is no real advantage to dual wielding magical weapons either right ?
Barring special ranger powers (that I know admittingly little about) you cannot attack and benefit from both weapons at once.

All attacks is resolved from the main hand weapon, with the off-hand only providing some small bonuses if you have the proper feats. Even if it's uber magical.

 

[eamon]

if you want a balance reason, it's because sword and board is already the best choice for those with proficiency, giving them an extra slot is buffing what is already the best option.

Already now, it is quite possible to make a very powerful two-handed weapon wielder, so I don't think this statement holds water. Using a shield or a two-handed weapon is a choice which determines the type of things you're good at, but one choice is not in absolute sense any more powerful than the other. We'll almost certainly see a barbarian-style class sometime within reasonable time, which will make such a style even easier to play optimally - but it's already the case that a shield fighter cannot approach the damage of a two-handed weapon fighter, nor make use of the reach which a two-hander can easily avail himself of. And a two-hander can do both, since switching weapons isn't hard, esp. with quickdraw.

On the other hand, a two-handed weapon wielder just can't get the same AC very easily. There's no need to improve shield fighters by granting them an extra item slot.

 

[eamon]

But there is no real advantage to dual wielding magical weapons either right ?
Barring special ranger powers (that I know admittingly little about) you cannot attack and benefit from both weapons at once.

All attacks is resolved from the main hand weapon, with the off-hand only providing some small bonuses if you have the proper feats. Even if it's uber magical.

One advantage is the ability to take these ranger powers via multiclass feats - they can be excellent powers to have. Another advantage is that you don't need to choose in advance which weapon you're attacking with - you can attack with whatever is handy at that moment, so you're a little more flexible. You could attack with one weapon, but take OA's with another. If you have burst attacks like come and get it, you can attack cold-vulnerable opponents with your cold weapon, and cold-resistant opponents with a different weapon.

The advantage isn't huge, but it is there. With the fighter's power selection, using two weapons is probably sub-optimal, but it's doable with a ranger multiclass.