Shield spell + Mage Armor spell

[Christian]

Also, that +4 shield bonus doesn't go away when you're flat footed like a normal shield bonus ...

Shield bonuses are not lost when a character is flat-footed.

 

[Infiniti2000]

You can hold a mithril buckler, and a weapon, and cast a spell. That's the beauty of it.

You can? Assuming you have only two hands and need one of them to cast your spell, what allows you to cast with the buckler? The buckler is in hand, thus not allowing for the "one hand free" (it is at least considered "occupied").

I don't see the rule that allows you to cast a spell with the buckler-hand. Before you mention it, it is not "You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon ..." so what did I miss?

 

[Pinotage]

You can? Assuming you have only two hands and need one of them to cast your spell, what allows you to cast with the buckler? The buckler is in hand, thus not allowing for the "one hand free" (it is at least considered "occupied").

I don't see the rule that allows you to cast a spell with the buckler-hand. Before you mention it, it is not "You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon ..." so what did I miss?

The buckler is strapped to your forearm, and technically not held in hand at all. That combined with the fact that you can use a weapon while wielding a buckler makes me think you can cast spells with the buckler hand.

Pinotage

 

[Infiniti2000]

The buckler is strapped to your forearm, and technically not held in hand at all. That combined with the fact that you can use a weapon while wielding a buckler makes me think you can cast spells with the buckler hand.

You can use a weapon because it was explicitly mentioned. It does not explicitly mention casting spells and there's ample evidence to prove that casting spells and wielding a weapon are not identical. I would allow you to wield a wand in that hand, though.

On the other hand (no pun intended), you could just wield the weapon in the buckler hand.

 

[MarkB]

You can use a weapon because it was explicitly mentioned. It does not explicitly mention casting spells and there's ample evidence to prove that casting spells and wielding a weapon are not identical. I would allow you to wield a wand in that hand, though.

On the other hand (no pun intended), you could just wield the weapon in the buckler hand.

It's mentioned in the 3.5 FAQ:

My DM says that my cleric has to drop his morningstar to cast spells. Is he right?
Yes and no. To cast a spell with a somatic (S) component, you must gesture freely with at least one hand. (Player’s Handbook, page 140) A cleric (or any caster, for that matter)
who holds a weapon in one hand and wears a heavy shield on the other arm doesn’t have a hand free to cast a spell with a somatic component (which includes most spells in the game). To cast such a spell, the character must either drop or sheathe his weapon.
Another simple option is for the cleric to carry a buckler or light shield instead of a heavy shield. The buckler leaves one hand free for spellcasting, and you don’t even lose the
buckler’s shield bonus to AC when casting with that hand. The light shield doesn’t give you a free hand for spellcasting, but since you can hold an item in the same hand that holds the light shield, you could switch your weapon to that hand to free up a hand for spellcasting. (You can’t use the weapon while it’s held in the same hand as your shield, of course.) The rules don’t state what type of action is required to switch hands on a weapon, but it seems reasonable to assume that it’s the equivalent of drawing a weapon (a move action that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity).

That's for clerics, but the rules don't specify any difference in restrictions on spellcasting gestures for arcane casters compared to clerics, beyond the arcane spell failure chance, so it's equally applicable to them.

 

[Egres]

Yeah! They can get their Shield spells out of a Minor Ring of Spell Storing like everyone else!

-Hyp.

You can have only two ring functioning at the same time, but tons of potions.

 

[rgard]

You can have only two ring functioning at the same time, but tons of potions.

Yes, but I've house-ruled the 1E potion miscibility rules into 3.5.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Infiniti2000]

Yes, but I've house-ruled the 1E potion miscibility rules into 3.5.

I Wouldn't Drink That If I Were You

 

[Darthjaye]

Yes, but if you cast, you loose the buckler's bonus (Just like if you were to attack).

You do , but taking the feat Improved Buckler Defense would avoid that. You also incur the arcane spell failure of the buckler unless it Mithrial (or provides some other way by class or magic to negate this spell failure).

 

[Mistwell]

You can? Assuming you have only two hands and need one of them to cast your spell, what allows you to cast with the buckler? The buckler is in hand, thus not allowing for the "one hand free" (it is at least considered "occupied").

I don't see the rule that allows you to cast a spell with the buckler-hand. Before you mention it, it is not "You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon ..." so what did I miss?

FAQ: The buckler leaves one hand free for spellcasting, and you don’t even lose the
buckler’s shield bonus to AC when casting with that hand.

[Edit - and I see someone else already posted that FAQ entry. I was too slow].