Full Attack action & Armor Spikes

[Camarath]

I understand what you're saying. The only problem I'm having is finding in the rules a quote that lets you make off-hand attacks with other parts of your body than your off-hand, unless we're heading in monstrous territory.

I like wise can find no rule that states that one must use one's hand to make an attack with a weapon that is not in or on one's hand. I do not believe that armor spikes are present on or in ones hands. I believe them to be present on the characters armor which IMO does not inculde gauntlets since gauntlets may be enchanted and are weapons in their own right. And since the armor spikes one attacks with can not be on the character's forearms or in the character's hands I find it very odd to assume that it still requires the use of a hand to make the attack and thus assume that it does not require that use of an hand to make the attack.

In any case I can't see how attacking with armor spikes could be considered to be using your shield as a weapon which is the only reason listed for losing one shield bonus to AC when using a light or heavy shield. Are you suggesting that you can not make off-hand attacks with armor spikes while using a light or heavy shield and making primary attacks with another weapon since one can not use the hand bearing the shield to attack with weapons other than the shield?

That's the only quote I could find to back my position. An off-hand weapon is a weapon you use in your off-hand.

Unless a specific weapon or ability states that it may be used as an or in place of off-hand attacks, in which case one may use it for such even if it does not require the use of one's hand as would be normal for a weapon.

But you're right, If my armor spikes are on my leg, then there would be no logical reason for me to lose my shield bonus if I were to kick someone.

I do not believe there is a logical reason why you could lose you shield bonus and attack with armor spikes.

 

[DarkMaster]

I do not believe there is a logical reason why you could lose you shield bonus and attack with armor spikes.

I have one.
how can you keep that shield bonus while trying to impale you opponent on the spikes located on your shoulders, You got to be pretty close.

Don't forget that spikes are dealing 1d6 pts of damage, that's a shortsword damage. There are not too many places where you can put a short sword spiking out of your body and it doesn't bother your movement and it's usefull in combat. Having the spike in your back won't help much. A spike on a knee or foot would be the equivalent of spiked gauntlet (not long enough to be considered for 1d6 dmg), could be horns on your helmet(again explain how can you use them and keep shield bonus), could be like I said multiple spikes on your shoulders, If you look at history book you would notice that's were spikes were puts on armor, anywhere on your member would be more dangerous to you than your opponent.

 

[Camarath]

I have one.
how can you keep that shield bonus while trying to impale you opponent on the spikes located on your shoulders, You got to be pretty close.

You could tuck the shield down below your shoulder to protect you torso and upper legs and provide a glancing surface to deflect blows that you would other wise be to close to dodge or parry.

I was not saying that I could not see a real world justification for it. What I meant is that as per the rules I believe that either one would not be able to make off-hand attacks with armor spikes while using a shield because one must use a hand to make off-hand attacks or one can make off-hand attacks using armor spikes while using a shield but would not lose the shield bonus because one is not using the shield as a weapon.