Bashing Shield and Spikes?

[reapersaurus]

While I understand the line of reasoning that believes a Large Bashing Shield with spikes should only do 1d8 of damage (1d8+1 if performing a shield bash), I don't agree with it.

This is a +2 effective enchantment.
It does 1d8 if it hits you.
Why wouldn't putting spikes on the shield up the damage the same way it ups the damage of a normal shield?

 

[Corwin]

Why wouldn't putting spikes on the shield up the damage the same way it ups the damage of a normal shield?

IMO, because the spikes are not also included in the Bashing enhancement. The spikes, in fact, are a separate item that happens to be attached to the magic shield. The spikes remain non-magical even though the shield is enchanted (non SKW term, I know ). Unless...

The advantage to spiking a Bashing shield, IMO, is that you can enchant the spikes to above the +1 that Bashing gives you. You could also stack on other weapon enhancements (like flaming, keen, etc.).

All the while, under my houserule-ish interpretation, they still combine to give you the 1d8 damage from Bashing and the Piercing capability of the spikes.

 

[da chicken]

I'd say you have a shield which would either deal 1d8/x2 Bludgeoning, or 1d6/x2 Piercing. The major difference here is that I'd allow a PC to enchant Shield Spikes as a weapon, but I wouldn't allow the same on a Bashing Shield. I know it is just me, but somehow I can't see allowing a non-spiked shield to be enchanted. That's not by the book, so I guess it would be a house rule.

In other words, you could have a Large Spiked Darkwood Shield +5, Heavy Fortification, with +5 Keen Spikes of Speed.

 

[reapersaurus]

Look.
Let's step away from the rulebooks for a second, shall we?

I understand the basis for a guess that putting spikes on a shield makes the spikes the weapon that's doing the damage.

I don't agree.

Spikes on their own don't do ANYTHING.
You'd have to throw them.

Putting spikes on a shield makes the shield a spiked shield.
This a new kind of weapon that does 1d6 piercing.

The book might suggest that spikes are the weapon, but that's patently impossible.
Spikes wouldn't be floating in the air causing someone to be hit.

Therefore, if you spend +2 enchantment to make a Bashing Shield which is the weakest enchantment in the entire game, I don't see how adding spikes to a 1d8 weapon wouldn't cause more damage.

A Bashing Shield does 1d8 damage due to the magical power force that allows great momentum to be applied to the target.
You are hitting the target with the shield face.

Add spikes to this weapon.

Explain how it would do the same damage. (Reasonably - don't hide behind rules interpretations)

Thanks in advance.

 

[dead_radish]

It's magic?

Balance?

Putting spikes on the shield interferes with the bashing enchantment, such that trying to bash with the spikes becomes counter productive, or less effective?

 

[Tony Vargas]

The book might suggest that spikes are the weapon, but that's patently impossible.
Spikes wouldn't be floating in the air causing someone to be hit.

I don't know what you think you're trying to prove by that statement. The spikes are on the shield, the spikes do the piercing damage, the shield doesn't.

What you're saying is like claiming that a sword isn't a weapon, because someone has to swing it - so thier /hand/ is actually the weapon.

Therefore, if you spend +2 enchantment to make a Bashing Shield which is the weakest enchantment in the entire game, I don't see how adding spikes to a 1d8 weapon wouldn't cause more damage.

Bashing is an enchantment clearly meant for regular (non spikey) shields. Shield and armor spikes are enchanted /sepparately/, as weapons.

It'd be perfectly reasonable to rule that it doesn't even fucntion when placed on a spiked shield - after all, it's /Bashing/, not 'Impaling.'

I think it'd be more fair and reasonable to allow a bashing spiked shield to either bash or be used to do piercing damage with the spikes. That's also probably the best 'legal' result you could get.

I'd be willing to push it slightly and allow /Bashing/ to increase the damage of the spiked shield to d8 and be both piercing and bashing - effectively, it's a morningstar that can be used as a light weapon. Actually, that's probably too generous.

Explain how it would do the same damage. (Reasonably - don't hide behind rules interpretations)

Well, let's look at a standard weapon in the PH as an example:

A Morningstar and a heavy mace both do d8 damage. The only difference is that the Morningstar is spiked. Since it's spiked it does bashing + piercing damage - not d10 damage.

Reasonably, it'd do less damage - the d6 damage from the spikes, since the magic aplies to the shield. If you want to argue that the spiked shield is, itself, a complete, unified weapon, then the bashing enchantement couldn't be aplied to it - it's not an weapon enchantment.

 

[reapersaurus]

Perfectly reasonable IN GAME reasoning there, Tony.
Good input, as far as it goes.

However, again I'll step back from the rules and attempt a definition of a Shield Bash: an attack with a shield, propelling the face of the shield into the opponent.

The SHIELD (armor, BTW) is being used to attack.
The Bashing enchantment is specifically designed to be used on a piece of armor that's being used in an attack.
It IS a unique enchantment, and somewhat hard to compare to other weapons.

If you believe that a Large shield with spikes being used in a shield bash attack is significantly different than a Large non-spiked shield being used in the same attack, than I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

My feeling is that Shield Spikes are NOT a seperate weapon unto themselves.
A Large Shield is armor that can be used in a special attack.
A spiked Large Shield is armor that can be used in a special attack.

And by the way, Armor Spikes are not the same thing:
Armor can't be used in a special attack by itself.
Armor MUST have spikes put on it to attack.
Shields have that special attack feature built-in.

 

[Volefisk]

...I don't see how adding spikes to a 1d8 weapon wouldn't cause more damage.

...Explain how it would do the same damage. (Reasonably - don't hide behind rules interpretations)

A Bashing Shield (as you put it) magically "allows great momentum to be applied to the target. You are hitting the target with the shield face." Shield spikes extend beyond the face of the shield, limiting target contact with the enchanted face of the shield. Ergo, the enchantment (at the very least) doesn't do full bashing damage, stacking with the spike damage. If the spikes inhibit shield face contact with the target, they may even prevent the bashing damage from being applied at all.

It's a little hokey, but a perfectly reasonable set of explanations for either the 1d6p/1d8b or 1d8p/b arguments. And, as you requested, it doesn't involve rules interpretations.

<volefisk>

 

[reapersaurus]

Shield spikes extend beyond the face of the shield, limiting target contact with the enchanted face of the shield.
It's a little hokey, but a perfectly reasonable set of explanations for either the 1d6p/1d8b or 1d8p/b arguments.

Na, I don't think it's hokey, I think that makes sense for a spiked shield that hurts someone by skewering them with the spikes.

However, your description made me look at the example in the PHB of a spiked shield, and I realize that what I'm thinking of a spiked shield is not what they have pictured.
Not even close.
Those spikes are ludicrously long, like daggers sticking out of the shield (very much like a targe with a center spike - very unweildy).

What I think of a spiked shield, I think of MANY spikey protrusions on the surface of the shield, maybe 2" sticking out.
This gives a much more damaging SURFACE to the shiled by which to do a lot of damage to the recipient of this large-momentum attack.

What do you guys picture a spiked shield is like?
If you think of it as daggers protruding from a shield, I can certainly understand a belief in the spikes being a seperate weapon from the shield.

 

[Volefisk]

What do you guys picture a spiked shield is like?
If you think of it as daggers protruding from a shield, I can certainly understand a belief in the spikes being a seperate weapon from the shield.

When I think of a typical wielder of a spiked shield, I think of a heavily armoured combat-type fighting similarly outfitted foes. With this in mind, 2" spikes are not going to do much damage against someone in full armour... it's just not likely to penetrate through the layers of armour, cloth, and skin/hide to damage anything critical. Good, perhaps against unarmoured foes, but not against those the wielder would typically fight.

The long dagger-like spikes are more likely to penetrate armour and do sigificant damage.

I see where you're coming from with the many-small-spikes visualization, but it just doesn't seem as effective against fully armoured enemies. We'd need a game mechanic to discriminate between heavily armoured/lightly armoured/unarmoured targets for the purposes of determining damage... and 3e seems to invite handling combat in a more abtract way than these sorts of complications would allow.

Just one opinion, though.

<volefisk>