Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Marnak" data-source="post: 3447388" data-attributes="member: 24886">In latest issue of Dragon, the Sage weighs in on armor and shields.&nbsp; He states that a character who possesses a shield proficiency also possesses proficiency in the related shield bash attack.&nbsp; For example, bards can use light shields for AC and so can also use light shields to bash (with or without spikes).&nbsp; This goes against how I read the rules.According to the SRD under light shields:&nbsp; &quot;Shield Bash Attacks:&nbsp; You can bash an opponent with a light shield, using it as an off-hand weapon. See Table: Weapons for the damage dealt by a shield bash. Used this way, a light shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon. For the purpose of penalties on attack rolls, treat a light shield as a light weapon. If you use your shield as a weapon, you lose its AC bonus until your next action (usually until the next round).&quot;If a shield bash is a martial bludgeoning weapon, it has always seemed to me to be the case that only characters with access to martial weapons could bash with it.&nbsp; But perhaps we are supposed to interpret the proficiency listing under each class as applying to shield AC use and shield bash use.Thus, I should read the SRD:&nbsp; &quot;Bards are proficient with light armor and shields (except tower shields).&quot;&nbsp; So, this means bards can defend and attack with shields?This brings me to my final question, why does SRD go out of its way to define shield bash attacks as &quot;martial&quot; weapons if proficiency in their use is really tied to shield proficiency itself?&nbsp; In other words, no one would ever take Martial Weapon Proficiency (light shield) because another feat, Shield Proficiency, gives you both the defensive and offensive advantages of both the heavy and the light shield.I kind of like the Sage's ruling from a logical standpoint (shield proficiency is shield proficiency), but I am wondering if it goes along with RAW or not.Thanks in advance for any input you might provide.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Marnak, post: 3447388, member: 24886"] In latest issue of Dragon, the Sage weighs in on armor and shields. He states that a character who possesses a shield proficiency also possesses proficiency in the related shield bash attack. For example, bards can use light shields for AC and so can also use light shields to bash (with or without spikes). This goes against how I read the rules. According to the SRD under light shields: "Shield Bash Attacks: You can bash an opponent with a light shield, using it as an off-hand weapon. See Table: Weapons for the damage dealt by a shield bash. Used this way, a light shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon. For the purpose of penalties on attack rolls, treat a light shield as a light weapon. If you use your shield as a weapon, you lose its AC bonus until your next action (usually until the next round)." If a shield bash is a martial bludgeoning weapon, it has always seemed to me to be the case that only characters with access to martial weapons could bash with it. But perhaps we are supposed to interpret the proficiency listing under each class as applying to shield AC use and shield bash use. Thus, I should read the SRD: "Bards are proficient with light armor and shields (except tower shields)." So, this means bards can defend and attack with shields? This brings me to my final question, why does SRD go out of its way to define shield bash attacks as "martial" weapons if proficiency in their use is really tied to shield proficiency itself? In other words, no one would ever take Martial Weapon Proficiency (light shield) because another feat, Shield Proficiency, gives you both the defensive and offensive advantages of both the heavy and the light shield. I kind of like the Sage's ruling from a logical standpoint (shield proficiency is shield proficiency), but I am wondering if it goes along with RAW or not. Thanks in advance for any input you might provide. [/QUOTE]

Verification