EyeontheMountain
First Post
frankthedm said:
Very very true. I ban the suckers as soon as someone suggests wanting one.
Animated Shields
- Thread starter Krel
- Start date
Very very true. I ban the suckers as soon as someone suggests wanting one.
Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
My opinion would actually be
Option 3: Cheesy cheese cheese with extra cheese.
Where they invented by the same designer who introduced 2-for-1 power attack for 2H weapons?!?
Option 3: Cheesy cheese cheese with extra cheese.
Where they invented by the same designer who introduced 2-for-1 power attack for 2H weapons?!?
Korak
First Post
Are they more cheesy than dual wielding with improved buckler defense and the piddly -1 to off hand attacks? A little bit... but the dual wielder could always use one too. I think most of the distaste people have for animated shields comes from the relative imbalance in combat styles in 3.5e.
I think the real reason animated shields are a bit over the top is the relatively low cost of using magic vestment to pump the AC bonus to compensate for supposedly giving up +2 in enhancement bonus to AC. Then again, this is true of all weapon and armor properties. Raw enhancement has been greatly de-valued. If an animated shield wielder was always 2 AC behind his non-animated shield buddy, it wouldn't be as bad.
As for negating the AC benefits of staying sword and board... one could argue that actual sword and board style is only meant for low level characters or low magic worlds. Alternatively one could argue that if you take the right feats, shield fighting can be very good (shield slam, charge, etc).
I do think that there is a definite disparity between two handed weapons and other styles as the game stands now. IMO, the biggest cause of the disparity is the imbalance in feat investment. TWF or Sword and Board require numerous feats to really payoff. Two handed weapons payoff with just Power Attack. Things have improved with PHBII. However, I would strongly consider reducing the feat requirements to get full iterative attacks with the off-hand.
I think the real reason animated shields are a bit over the top is the relatively low cost of using magic vestment to pump the AC bonus to compensate for supposedly giving up +2 in enhancement bonus to AC. Then again, this is true of all weapon and armor properties. Raw enhancement has been greatly de-valued. If an animated shield wielder was always 2 AC behind his non-animated shield buddy, it wouldn't be as bad.
As for negating the AC benefits of staying sword and board... one could argue that actual sword and board style is only meant for low level characters or low magic worlds. Alternatively one could argue that if you take the right feats, shield fighting can be very good (shield slam, charge, etc).
I do think that there is a definite disparity between two handed weapons and other styles as the game stands now. IMO, the biggest cause of the disparity is the imbalance in feat investment. TWF or Sword and Board require numerous feats to really payoff. Two handed weapons payoff with just Power Attack. Things have improved with PHBII. However, I would strongly consider reducing the feat requirements to get full iterative attacks with the off-hand.
Nonlethal Force
First Post
Yeah, I voted as close to a "nerf them" option as I could. I don't ban them in my games, but I've ever had a player actually bold enough to ask for something so cheesy either. On that matter, for as long as the players don't use them, the BBEGs don't use them as well. Bleach. Horrible option in the game.
And I also agree about 2 for 1 power attacking rule, too. Like two handed fighters need other things to make them more supreme.
On that matter, for as long as the players don't use them, the BBEGs don't use them as well. Bleach. Horrible option in the game.And I also agree about 2 for 1 power attacking rule, too. Like two handed fighters need other things to make them more supreme.
Alzrius
The EN World kitten
frankthedm said:
The point isn't what one gains with a two-handed weapon. The point is that they can gain that anyway, and still get all the benefits of a shield in other, less costly ways.
A cat's grace spell is going to give them a +2 bonus to AC (via the Dex increase) that would equal what you'd get from a +1 animated light steel shield (and stronger magic, such as a barkskin spell from a 6th-level or higher caster, can equal or eclipse larger shields), save that the spell can't be sundered, won't cost you several thousand gold pieces, and won't have an arcane spell failure chance if you're also an arcane spellcaster.
That's just one of about a hundred different ways characters can increase their AC while keeping both hands free. I just see animated shields as costing the most and having the most drawbacks of those methods, which is why I have no problem with it.
Infiniti2000
First Post
Your example, and everyone one of those hundred different ways, are all red herrings. The reason why is because both characters (2-handed & Sword/Board) can take all those same options, rendering the comparison moot.Alzrius said:
The difference, however, is that only the Sword/Board can benefit from a different type of AC bonus (shield) that stacks with those hundred different ways unless you give the 2-hander the option of using an animated shield*. That's a significant difference in those hundred different ways.
* The option of a 2-hander multiclassing to gain access to a shield spell or even using UMD notwithstanding. Neither option is pertinent to this discussion.
Dracorat
First Post
I have zero issue with animated shields. Additionally, I am designing an adventure at the moment and one of the last BBEGs in it is a special prestige class I created (available only to this one NPC, never to PCs) that can use two animated shields simultaneously and a shield golem all at the same time.
