Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sejs" data-source="post: 931313" data-attributes="member: 4910">By 'use' do you mean get the AC bonus from the buckler, or that you wouldn't allow someone to attack with the hand that has a buckler on it?&nbsp; Normally, you can wear a buckler on the off-arm, and wield a weapon in the off-hand, but if you attack with the off-hand weapon you forfit the buckler's AC bonus and suffer a -1 to hit.&nbsp; If you wanted to attack (still at -1), but retain the buckler's AC bonus you'd have to take the Shield Expert feat.&nbsp; If you wouldn't allow someone with a buckler on their off-arm to attack at all... then what's the point of a buckler?&nbsp; It would just be a small shield that costs more money for some reason.&nbsp;Not threatening an area with a spiked gauntlet if that hand is currently occupied with a weapon makes sense.&nbsp; The hand is already doing something, and the primary benefit of the spiked gauntlet is that you can be disarmed of your normal weapon and still be armed.&nbsp; Or if you're supprised or whatnot, you're still armed even if you don't have your sword out - you have a weapon built in to your gauntlet.&nbsp; Not allowing armor spikes to threaten an area, however, I disagree with.&nbsp; Armor spikes are a martial weapon, and don't require the interaction of your hands at all.&nbsp; Your hands being otherwise occupied (or bound, or missing, etc) shouldn't impact your ability to use armor spikes.melkoriii:&nbsp;When you attack with any shield you lose it's Ac bonus for that round unless you have the Shield Expert feat. A buckler lets you wield a weapon in that hand, rather than having to shield bash (as buckler's cannot shield bash anyway).&nbsp; A small shield, however, doesn't let you wield a weapon in that hand - you can hold a torch, a potion, or whatever.. you could even hold a weapon in that hand - but you can't attack with it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sejs, post: 931313, member: 4910"] By 'use' do you mean get the AC bonus from the buckler, or that you wouldn't allow someone to attack with the hand that has a buckler on it? Normally, you can wear a buckler on the off-arm, and wield a weapon in the off-hand, but if you attack with the off-hand weapon you forfit the buckler's AC bonus and suffer a -1 to hit. If you wanted to attack (still at -1), but retain the buckler's AC bonus you'd have to take the Shield Expert feat. If you wouldn't allow someone with a buckler on their off-arm to attack at all... then what's the point of a buckler? It would just be a small shield that costs more money for some reason. Not threatening an area with a spiked gauntlet if that hand is currently occupied with a weapon makes sense. The hand is already doing something, and the primary benefit of the spiked gauntlet is that you can be disarmed of your normal weapon and still be armed. Or if you're supprised or whatnot, you're still armed even if you don't have your sword out - you have a weapon built in to your gauntlet. Not allowing armor spikes to threaten an area, however, I disagree with. Armor spikes are a martial weapon, and don't require the interaction of your hands at all. Your hands being otherwise occupied (or bound, or missing, etc) shouldn't impact your ability to use armor spikes. melkoriii: When you attack with any shield you lose it's Ac bonus for that round unless you have the Shield Expert feat. A buckler lets you wield a weapon in that hand, rather than having to shield bash (as buckler's cannot shield bash anyway). A small shield, however, doesn't let you wield a weapon in that hand - you can hold a torch, a potion, or whatever.. you could even hold a weapon in that hand - but you can't attack with it. [/QUOTE]

Verification