Complete Warrior - Improved Buckler Defense feat

[Legildur]

...The problem with the feat is that it's better than TWD even with a nonmagical buckler as long as you don't fight defensively and as long you don't carry too much stuff to be able to carry a buckler.

Does it change the picture at all to remind us all of the -1 attack penalty?

From the buckler description of the 3.5 SRD:

You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so.

 

[Ranger REG]

Apologies in advance, but I don't have books here.

From memory, the Improved Buckler Defense feat from Complete Warrior allows a character to keep the shield bonus to AC when attacking with a weapon in the shield hand (or words to that affect).

My question is, would this also apply to a character wielding a weapon with two-hands? For example, either a double weapon, or say a greatsword.

I suspect not for the greatsword.

By the letter of the rules, you can make an off-hand attack(s) while you retain the shield bonus to AC from your buckler.

No mention on using it with a two-handed weapon. You can use it with a double weapon, assuming you're making a two-weapon fighting attacks.

 

[jgsugden]

I don't have a problem with Epic characters getting a +10 or even +11 from a shield, most (if not all the monsters) after level 15th level pretty much always hit with the first and second attacks anyway.

Also , the characters are Epic, and they tend to have Epic abilities and Epic gear.

The issue here is not that epic level characters get an epic level shield bonus, the issue is that epic level characters might be getting that shield bonus while enjoying the epic benefits of two weapon fighting because they have a single feat. One normal feat, by itself, should not even give a general +1 to AC if it is going to be balanced with dodge (which is +1 to AC versus 1 foe only). Too much bang for the buck is the issue here.

At epic levels, however, this begins to matter less and less. Any two weapon wielding PC going into epic levels should probably have some way of generating a shield bonus. Usually a shield spell or a dancing shield ...

 

[Benben]

Technically this is two feats: Shield Proficiency and Improved Buckler Defense. Although the first one is granted for free by many classes, Improved Buckler Defense is still a chain feat.

Dodge might seem weak with only a +1 Dodge bonus to one foe, but it's real importance is that it's the foundation for a few core, and a lot of non-core feat chains.

 

[Ranger REG]

As for Buckler Defense making Two-Weapon Defense worthless, I doubt it. One requires a buckler shield, the other requires a weapon (including unarmed strike) in the off-hand.

While both offers +1 shield bonus to AC (assuming nomagical buckler), both retains two-weapon fighting penalties in order to make attack from both primary hand and off hand.

Of course, you can always try to acquire magical buckler to increase the shield to your AC, but that may be a drawback (relying on the buckler). Just don't enter into any antimagic field.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I don't think it's too good of a feat.

Vs. Two Weapon Defense, etc.
1. Two Weapon Defense, etc are pretty weak feats. If we threw away every feat that was better than them, we'd be down to dodge (no feat chain attached), toughness, skill focus, and combat casting.

2. This feat doesn't remove the -1 to hit for attacking while wearing a buckler.

Second, at the levels that the feat becomes the ability to get +6 to AC and special abilities, Animated shields are readily available which can offer from +2 to +9 AC (+9 is an animated +5 tower shield). So those without this feat are hardly precluded from using shields. Thus it's unreasonable to complain that it's a +6 AC bonus for a single feat.

Third, the bonus is situational. Situational feats are typically more powerful in their situation (see Mobility vis a vis Dodge). Any character who uses a buckler is likely to get the AC bonus a lot of the time anyway. If he's a two weapon wielder, he'll get it any time he's not able to make a full attack. (Which is a quite common situation) even without this feat. Any character who uses a buckler will get any special abilities on the buckler whether or not he attacks with it. (So a greatsword wielder can suck up the -1 to hit in order to gain the benefits of a Feathered Heavy Fortification buckler of absorbtion--which are substantial even if he never gets the AC bonus). So there's a little more leeway for a feat like this than for others.

 

[Ranger REG]

Vs. Two Weapon Defense, etc.
1. Two Weapon Defense, etc are pretty weak feats. If we threw away every feat that was better than them, we'd be down to dodge (no feat chain attached), toughness, skill focus, and combat casting.

And what feat is better than TWD when it comes to two-weapon fighting? I hope you're not suggesting Off-Hand Parry? That is worse because you sacrifice your off-hand attacks (single or multiple, depending on TWF feat tree acquired) for just a +2 bonus.

I mean honestly, what would YOU consider to be a good defensive feat for use with TWF? Combat Expertise? The penalty will stack with TWF penalties.

2. This feat doesn't remove the -1 to hit for attacking while wearing a buckler.

No, it made no mention. This penalty is in addition to any penalty (i.e. two-weapon fighting) when you attack with your off hand.

Second, at the levels that the feat becomes the ability to get +6 to AC and special abilities, Animated shields are readily available which can offer from +2 to +9 AC (+9 is an animated +5 tower shield). So those without this feat are hardly precluded from using shields. Thus it's unreasonable to complain that it's a +6 AC bonus for a single feat.

But how many fighters or martial-type non-spellcasting classes are going to devote their character toward 12 caster levels?

Or are they going to shop at Ye Olde Wal-Mart?

What happens if said buckler is in the midst of an antimagic field?

Third, the bonus is situational. Situational feats are typically more powerful in their situation (see Mobility vis a vis Dodge). Any character who uses a buckler is likely to get the AC bonus a lot of the time anyway. If he's a two weapon wielder, he'll get it any time he's not able to make a full attack. (Which is a quite common situation) even without this feat. Any character who uses a buckler will get any special abilities on the buckler whether or not he attacks with it. (So a greatsword wielder can suck up the -1 to hit in order to gain the benefits of a Feathered Heavy Fortification buckler of absorbtion--which are substantial even if he never gets the AC bonus). So there's a little more leeway for a feat like this than for others.

Even relying on equipment is just as situational. Unless of course you have a gullible DM that give out magic items like cookies.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

And what feat is better than TWD when it comes to two-weapon fighting? I hope you're not suggesting Off-Hand Parry? That is worse because you sacrifice your off-hand attacks (single or multiple, depending on TWF feat tree acquired) for just a +2 bonus.

I mean honestly, what would YOU consider to be a good defensive feat for use with TWF? Combat Expertise? The penalty will stack with TWF penalties.

Just because there isn't a better feat for a particular purpose doesn't make a feat good. Until Complete Warrior, 3.5 had no feat to increase hit points other than toughness. That didn't make toughness a powerful feat choice.

Now, with Complete Warrior, I would think that Dodge is probably a better defensive feat for the TWF than TWD. Dodge leads to Elusive Target which would be very useful for TWF characters who tend to rely upon full attacks and thus are often not too mobile. It also leads to Spring Attack just in case the TWF character wants to be mobile and has to give up using TWF in some situations.

And, I think Improved Buckler Defense is better than TWD. That doesn't make it overpowered any more than skill focus: concentration being better than Combat Casting makes it overpowered though.

No, it made no mention. This penalty is in addition to any penalty (i.e. two-weapon fighting) when you attack with your off hand.

That was my point. I think we're in agreement on this point.

But how many fighters or martial-type non-spellcasting classes are going to devote their character toward 12 caster levels?

Or are they going to shop at Ye Olde Wal-Mart?

What happens if said buckler is in the midst of an antimagic field?

I don't see what this has to do with anything. Another party member could be a spellcaster and make the item. The party could commission the item from an NPC or find it in the horde of a defeated foe. Or, yes, they could find at at Ye Olde Wal-Mart (lowest price guaranteed--10% discount off Dungeon Master's Guide prices). If one wants to examine the balance of a feat, one has to examine the possible ways it could combine with items. (A feat that allowed paladins to treat [good] swords as Evil Outsider and Undead Bane, Vorpal, and Epic wouldn't be balanced just because some paladins will not find Holy or good aligned swords). Assuming that equimpent will not be available is not a viable way of testing for balance.

Even relying on equipment is just as situational. Unless of course you have a gullible DM that give out magic items like cookies.

Yeah yeah. That situation, however, is entirely irrelevant to the question of balance. An Exotic Weapon Focus feat that gave +5 to hit with a Tralian Hammer wouldn't be balanced just because the character might never find a magical tralian hammer. In most campaigns, characters eventually find magical versions of the gear they use or upgrade their gear to higher enhancements. We evaluate Weapon Focus: Greatsword under the assumption that a character who chooses it will probably wield a greatsword and will probably eventually find a magical one. Similarly, feats like Improved Buckler Defense should be evaluated under the assumption that characters will find or improve the shield they use. And they should also be evaluated under the assumption that characters without the feat will also find or improve the equipment they use. If you treat the Greatsword+buckler character as if there are no magic bucklers until he takes the feat and then a +5 adamantine buckler or heavy fortification becomes available, you're not really engaging in a reasonable evaluation of the feat. You're engaging in an evaluation of the way the DM hands out magic items.

 

[Hardhead]

This feat is WAY too good.

It's quite simply better than TWD. They both give a +1 shield bonus, and IBD can get better than that, once you enchant the buckler, which isn't expensive. Sure, an anti-magic field negates the extra bonuses, but seriously, who puts their groups in anti-magic fields more than once or twice their entire career?

And yes, you get a -1 to an attack with one of your weapons, but it still gives you a better increase than Expertise, which requires you to trade to-hit for AC on a one-for-one basis. IBD only makes you trade the -1 to half of your attacks, and the benefit will be better than +1 to AC as soon as you get that buckler enchanted, which can happen relatively early in your career, since it only costs 1k.

 

[Ranger REG]

This feat is WAY too good.

It's quite simply better than TWD. They both give a +1 shield bonus, and IBD can get better than that, once you enchant the buckler, which isn't expensive. Sure, an anti-magic field negates the extra bonuses, but seriously, who puts their groups in anti-magic fields more than once or twice their entire career?

IOW, the person got to have access to magic. After all, what's D&D without magic, huh?

So where does that leaves those who wants to learn two-weapon fighting style or two-handed weapon fighting style, or single-weapon fighting style (no shield)?

If you can find an equal balance between all four fighting styles (five if you count unarmed fighting style), with or without magic in the game, by all means, I'm all ears.