Tempest using shield as off-hand weapon

[Liquidsabre]

So... what you're saying is that you're taking the prescriptive definition of the word 'weapon' (Something intended only for use as a weapon) as opposed to the descriptive definition (Something being used as a weapon) due to your preconcieved notion of the Tempest prestige class?

So you would allow a Tempest to gain this ability while wielding a ranged weapon like a bow in their off-hand I take it? Afterall, a ranged weapon is still a weapon and it fits the descriptive text in the Tempest special ability.

On the second half of this question, would you force a monk to be just like Friar Tuck, as opposed to an eastern monk, or a wizard to be just like Gandalf, as opposed to Questor Thews, or a bard not to suck in a 'kick in the door' campaign (Ok, you got me on that one), due to such preconcieved notions?

By preconceived notion I assume you mean the concept behind which the entire prestige was designed?

 

[melkorspawn]

A bow is a two-handed weapon, thus discounting it. If they made a compelling arguement, I would allow them to use a hand crossbow, though it would expend ammo each time they were attacked, and it takes a move equivalent action to reload a crossbow. The idea is that someone can use their weapon to defend themself holds regardless of whether it's a sword, or chair (have you ever seen a lion tamer?) or whatever.

As to your second comment: Unless your name is David Eckelberry, Mike Selinker, Wolfgand Baur, Michael Donais, Rich Redman, Jennifer Clarke Wilkes, Teeuwynn Woodruff, Jesse Decker, Richard Baker, Michelle Lyons, David Noonan or Stan! (verbatim), how can you presume to know the concept behind which the prestige class was designed? The designers could've easily put more shackles on the language to bind the players to a more stringent interpretation, but they didn't. Which makes me wonder (Though I should probably ask Stan! before jumping to conclusions) if they wanted a broader interpretation of the rules than that for which you're giving them credit.

 

[dagger]

You can also make a +1 Holy Giant Bane shield........its a weapon.

 

[Balord]

Personally, I think a "Weapon" should be defined as anything you can attack with and deal damage. A square of toilet paper obviously wouldn't count. But a tree branch or a chair definitely would, cause you could hurt someone with it. For a Tempest to be able to apply the special class AC bonus, I think he/her must be weilding one "weapon" in each hand, each of which can deal damage using melee attacks and/or likewise have some logical means of warding off attacks. A tempest could concievably use a longsword in his main hand and the sheath of the weapon in his off-hand as a parrying tool. I've seen this done in movies many times. (After the first few "rounds", the sheath usually gets Sundered. But before that happens, the sheath proves fairly effective as an off-hand parrying device.) And to those who might argue that a sheath could not be used as a melee weapon, I disagree. Most sword-sheaths are quite sturdy. They may not be very effective as a weapon, but I'm sure you could hit someone in the face with one and deal at least 1 point of damage.

I would probably think a chair a two-handed weapon, so unless it was a 'small' chair, or the Tempest was large, the Tempest would not gain any AC bonus with it.

 

[Balord]

New Feat: Lion Tamer
Benefit- You are proficient with using a chair of your size or smaller as a one handed weapon. You may also apply a +1 AC bonus against any single lion when holding a chair (you must be aware of lion, not flat-footed).

 

[melkorspawn]

I would probably think a chair a two-handed weapon, so unless it was a 'small' chair, or the Tempest was large, the Tempest would not gain any AC bonus with it.

It really depends how you use it. Wood is light. I'd definately allow a whip and chair character.

 

[Kristivas]

A shield can deffinately be considered a weapon.

My friend and I did this little 'skit' for halloween about 6 years ago for trick-or-treaters.. we'd get a groupd of about 5-10 and they would be led to the backyard where we were fighting with those hard-foam type weapons.

Well, my friend used his sword to 'accidentally' hit me in the junk, so I fell to one knee. Well, when I got up, as I was rising, I shield-bashed him in the face.

It was a plastic shield, but his nose still bled. Make it metal and add some shield spikes, and I'm sure his face would have looked like hamburger. It's actually pretty nifty to think of using a shield as an offhand weapon for the Tempest. Still, with them having to wear light armor, you might as well wear full plate and take all of the 2-weapon feats instead.

Then again, if you could get a mithril Breastplate... *shivers* that would be a tough character.

 

[melkorspawn]

A shield can deffinately be considered a weapon.
Well, when I got up, as I was rising, I shield-bashed him in the face.
It was a plastic shield, but his nose still bled. Make it metal and add some shield spikes, and I'm sure his face would have looked like hamburger.

Actually, in a stage combat setting, Broadsword & Shield is much more dangerous than even Rapier & Dagger, Two-Handed Broadsword, or pretty much any combo I can think of other than Flail (Those are very unpredictable).

 

[Joker]

Actually, in a stage combat setting, Broadsword & Shield is much more dangerous than even Rapier & Dagger, Two-Handed Broadsword, or pretty much any combo I can think of other than Flail (Those are very unpredictable).

Or cannon.

 

[baeleg]

Some modern practitioners of western martial arts have argued that shields should be considered "very defensive weapons" rather than armor. After all, any weapon has some defensive value to it, in that you can't just ignore my weapon as we fight, and I can use it to parry, void, etc.