Improved Shield Bash

[Hassassin]

Is there a way to make ISB (or shield bashing in general) not suck using the core rules? I've googled some threads that use obscure prestige classes, but anything I can think of within the core rules comes down to this:

Armor spikes are better than shield spikes.

The only situation in which I would prefer to use the shield is if it was a heavy shield and I was disarmed of my main weapon - in that case using it two handed would allow a better Str bonus to damage than armor spikes, which are a light weapon. That's kind of a long shot to prepare for.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

I don't think that it is easy to make it good. Feats from non-core books help some. Shield spikes plus the bashing property on a heavy shield are about the best you can find. I believe that gets you up to 2d6 damage on a single hand weapon, if strapped on the arm is pretty hard to disarm, and leaves an open hand( for things like casting or stunning fist or deflect arrows).

Get a DM ruling on what kind of action it would take to swapping back and forth between two-handed and single handed. My DM rules it was equivalent to a free action.

We had to house rule on whether a shield with spikes could be invested with weapon enhancements in addition to shield enhancement. My DM rules that if a shield basher was willing to pay the extra cost as if it was a separate item, the shield wielder could invest weapon enhancements.

Which opened up funny edge case enhancements, like the question of ghost touch shield enhancement on a shield being used for shield bashing. Our DM ruled it made sense that a ghost touched shield could affect incorporeal creatures as it it was a ghost touch weapon property. Sure, that's a +3 shield rating, but the cost for a shield enhancement is vastly less than a weapon enhancement in the uppermost enhancement +'s.

Certain characters do well with an open hand, a heavy shield with spikes and the bashing property can be an attractive option. For instance a high level paladin, holding a rod of quicken metamagic in the open hand to cast 4th level paladin spells (like holy sword on the spiked shield) as a free action.

If your DM rules a spiked shield can be enhanced with weapon enhancements, a lot of interesting things can open up.

 

[Wyvernhand]

Agile Shield Fighter (PHBII) lets you TWF (kinda) with a 1handed weapon and ANY sized shield. This is kinda cool. The "kinda" is there because ASF only gives you 1 offhand attack with the shield, while TWFing lets you take 1-2 other feats to get more attacks (ITWF, GTWF). The cool thing is that you can use a large shield in your offhand with ASF. A small shield is a light weapon, but a large shield is a 1-handed weapon. Normally, you'd be at a -4 with both weapons for TWFing with 2x 1handed weapons. ASF specifically maneuvers around this. That means that you can PA 1:1 with BOTH hands in conjunction with ASF, which is pretty nice.

Other than that, with Imp Shield Bash, you can use your shield to deliver martial strikes ala Tome of Battle. When you are adding +8d8 damage to your attack, the difference between a 1d6 shield and a 1d8 longsword becomes negligable.

If you take ASF, you should also take either Shield Ward (PHBII?) or Parrying Shield (Lords of Madness) to add your shield bonus to your touch AC. This is really nice if you have the Holy Shield feat (CWarrior) which adds a significant sacred bonus to your shield.

Also, check this out. Person_Man's Guide to Shields. Lots of useful stuff in there.

 

[Hassassin]

I don't think that it is easy to make it good. Feats from non-core books help some. Shield spikes plus the bashing property on a heavy shield are about the best you can find. I believe that gets you up to 2d6 damage on a single hand weapon, if strapped on the arm is pretty hard to disarm, and leaves an open hand( for things like casting or stunning fist or deflect arrows).

I forgot the bashing enhancement. A heavy shield with it deals 1d8, which is at least more than armor spikes. It doesn't say if it should stack with shield spikes, though. The +1 is nice, but it costs more than making the 1d6 armor spikes +1 the normal way.

(Note that armor spikes are *impossible* to disarm. )

Get a DM ruling on what kind of action it would take to swapping back and forth between two-handed and single handed. My DM rules it was equivalent to a free action.

Does that really require a ruling?

We had to house rule on whether a shield with spikes could be invested with weapon enhancements in addition to shield enhancement. My DM rules that if a shield basher was willing to pay the extra cost as if it was a separate item, the shield wielder could invest weapon enhancements.

That's in the rules:

An enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but a spiked shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.

The same is true for armor spikes and for spikeless shields. A weapon enhancement bonus on the shield wouldn't stack with the +1 from the bashing enhancement.

Which opened up funny edge case enhancements, like the question of ghost touch shield enhancement on a shield being used for shield bashing. Our DM ruled it made sense that a ghost touched shield could affect incorporeal creatures as it it was a ghost touch weapon property. Sure, that's a +3 shield rating, but the cost for a shield enhancement is vastly less than a weapon enhancement in the uppermost enhancement +'s.

That is indeed an interesting question. It doesn't make much sense that the shield (or armor) wouldn't work for bashing and that's a real advantage in cost.

If your DM rules a spiked shield can be enhanced with weapon enhancements, a lot of interesting things can open up.

Sure, but it's still not much better than having a shield in hand and using armor spikes for attacks. The bashing ability makes damage marginally better, even if the DM rules it doesn't stack with spikes, but the cost/benefit ratio goes down at higher levels.

Two-handed damage is a more significant advantage, and with a high strength caster build might actually make sense.

Anyway, thanks for the ideas.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

(Note that armor spikes are *impossible* to disarm. )

Yup. But an spiked armor wearing character must remove the armor when entering certain location demanding disarmament if met by stubborn guards. But a spiked shield wearing character will be able to keep armor on, just putting away the shield. Rat bastard DMs always love catching PCs without armor on.

Does that really require a ruling?

Dunno, maybe not. Kind of like a bastard sword proficient wielder switching between one- and two-handed. I had one rules lawyer try to make a claim that it was equivalent to drawing a weapon and would logically need Quickdraw to allow the shield holder to grab with the second hand as a free action. *shrug*

 

[Wyvernhand]

Sage ruled that taking one hand off of a weapon or putting one hand back on it was a free action (which basically allowed wielders of 2handed weapons to cast spells). Its already a free action for a longsword wielder to switch from 1handed to 2handed (you CAN 2hand a longsword). Why wouldn't it be a free action for a shield user to bring his 2nd hand up to the shield to add force behind the blow?

 

[Iku Rex]

Sage ruled that taking one hand off of a weapon or putting one hand back on it was a free action (which basically allowed wielders of 2handed weapons to cast spells). Its already a free action for a longsword wielder to switch from 1handed to 2handed (you CAN 2hand a longsword).

Source?

From the FAQ:

In a previous column, the Sage ruled that switching
weapons from one hand to the other should take a move
action. My group and I thought that seemed pretty long,
since it’s only a free action to drop something. Why can’t
you just drop it into your other hand?
It’s not really true that switching weapons from one hand to
another is just like dropping a weapon. When you drop a
weapon, you’re releasing it and letting it drop to the ground,
with no real guidance (or attention) as to exactly where it lands.
Switching a weapon from one hand to another is certainly more
complex than simply dropping it. At the very least, switching
hands would require you to use one hand to take the weapon
from the other and at most it involves using both hands together
in a coordinated action. Either way that sounds a lot like
drawing a weapon, which is a move action. When you simply
drop a weapon, you don’t really care where it lands, and it
doesn’t require you to use the other hand to guide the action.

You have a bastard sword in one hand. The Sage ruling is that moving it to your other hand is a move action. If you can put both hands on it as a free action, and let go with one hand as a free action, you can switch it from one hand to the other as a free action. So, putting both hands on a weapon should logically be a move action based on this ruling.

 

[Hassassin]

Source?

From the FAQ:

You have a bastard sword in one hand. The Sage ruling is that moving it to your other hand is a move action. If you can put both hands on it as a free action, and let go with one hand as a free action, you can switch it from one hand to the other as a free action. So, putting both hands on a weapon should logically be a move action based on this ruling.

That's not really the same. If you had a sword in your right hand you could easily grip it with both. However, if you released the right hand you wouldn't have it well in hand.

Think about tennis, for example. If you have the racket in you right hand it's still easy to use a two-handed backhand. It's much more difficult to swap the racket to your left hand and use a left-handed forehand - even if you're ambidextrous.

So if I were the DM I might not allow a free move to another hand, but would still allow a two-handed swing without changing grips.

 

[Iku Rex]

That's not really the same. If you had a sword in your right hand you could easily grip it with both. However, if you released the right hand you wouldn't have it well in hand.

Valid point, but it assumes more detail than I'd expect from DnD. You'd have to keep track of not only whether or not you're wielding/holding a weapon one-handed or two-handed, but also your current grip.

And if we're talking common sense I would expect shifting your grip on a weapon you're already holding in your hand to require no more effort than moving a hand to grab the hilt of a weapon in your other hand.

 

[Dandu]

Source?

From the FAQ:

You have a bastard sword in one hand. The Sage ruling is that moving it to your other hand is a move action. If you can put both hands on it as a free action, and let go with one hand as a free action, you can switch it from one hand to the other as a free action. So, putting both hands on a weapon should logically be a move action based on this ruling.

Although the rules don't mention it, letting go of a two-handed weapon with one hand or putting a free hand back on the weapon is a free action for you.