Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="IceBear" data-source="post: 191886" data-attributes="member: 1118">That's a point about the item description.  I've read it so fast before that I didn't catch the fluff about WHY it doesn't cause Arcane Failure or Armor Check penalty.That puts things into a different light.  They *could* be referring to the fact that if the spellcaster had nothing in his right hand and the shield in his left he could dispell the shield, cast the spell with his right (without any penalty), and then resummon the shield (which would continue to give the +2 to AC because the left hand wasn't used in the spellcasting.Bottom line, I wouldn't allow it to work one way for spellcasters and another way for 2H weapons which was what a few people suggested - you have to be consistent.Hmmmm...based on that fluff text I think I will side with you and Caliban.  It is, afterall, only +2 on AC.Also, with my original position, if the cleric was planning on casting a spell every round then he would be better off to drop his weapon rather than dispell the shield.  Seriously, this is one area that a lot of people forget (including myself).  If a cleric has a mace and shield ready and is in melee, if he wants to cast a spell, one of them has  to go first.  With this item, if he only wants to cast a spell and then go back to melee it would give him the choice of not having to drop his weapon.  If he was planning on multiple spells and wants the AC, then he needs a different plan.Anyway, that was my original stance, but based on the item description I'll allow either a spellcaster or 2H weapon weilder to dispell the shield, take their action and then resummon the shield continuing to get their +2 on ACIceBear</blockquote>

Verification