Concerning sword and board

[Kaeso]

A lot of people on these boards tend to look down on using a shield from an optimization perspective and claim that wielding a two handed weapon or two weapons (if you have an alternate source of damage) are better in every single way. However, what eludes a lot of people (IMHO) is that you don't need to choose between THF or SNB: you can have both.

The first way is the simple, yet oft overlooked shield bash. With the feat "Improved shield bash" and a spiked, light shield you can wield it as an off-hand weapon for 1d4 damage while still getting a nice +1 AC.

The second way is even better: spiked armor is wieldable as an offhand weapon for 1d6 damage, which means you can use a heavy shield to gain +2 AC whilst fighting with two "weapons".

Wouldn't this make sword and board a viable, perhaps even optimized way to fight for characters with alternate damage sources (such as strikes from ToB)?

[Partysan]

People using ToB can use shields alright if they want to, although they still aren't that useful. I think there's some Devoted Spirit maneuver that needs a shield. But ToB only makes it viable, not strong.

[agahii]

I believe that the reason a 2 hander is better than 2 one handers is that power attack is better with a two hander. True shield is considered worse than 2 one handers, but using a shield as a weapon just makes it as good as 2 one handers and still worse than a 2 hander.

Also with one 2 handed weapon you only have to pay to enchant one weapon.

[Airanath]

And you roll once to hit for your better power attack damage, as opposed to roll twice.
The problem with any TWF builds is: you gotta roll twice as much dice, getting twice as much chance to miss.

[Boci]

And you roll once to hit for your better power attack damage, as opposed to roll twice.
The problem with any TWF builds is: you gotta roll twice as much dice, getting twice as much chance to miss.

I don't think thats a major problem. Its beneficial as many times as it isn't (say against mirror images), and most of the time its neutral since you also have more chances to hit.

[Amphetryon]

A lot of people on these boards tend to look down on using a shield from an optimization perspective and claim that wielding a two handed weapon or two weapons (if you have an alternate source of damage) are better in every single way. However, what eludes a lot of people (IMHO) is that you don't need to choose between THF or SNB: you can have both.

The first way is the simple, yet oft overlooked shield bash. With the feat "Improved shield bash" and a spiked, light shield you can wield it as an off-hand weapon for 1d4 damage while still getting a nice +1 AC.

The second way is even better: spiked armor is wieldable as an offhand weapon for 1d6 damage, which means you can use a heavy shield to gain +2 AC whilst fighting with two "weapons".

Wouldn't this make sword and board a viable, perhaps even optimized way to fight for characters with alternate damage sources (such as strikes from ToB)?

The first way listed involves spending two feats in order to do less damage than a THF both per hit and per round, in order to increase AC by the smallest available increment. One of those feats (TWF) requires other feats in its chain to remain viable. Most detractors will call that less than optimal for their preferred playstyle.

The second way listed, again, involves spending feats in a chain in order to do less damage, although marginally more damage than the first way. It's also going to be contingent upon a decent STR and DEX (14+ in both) just to deal with encumbrance concerns. At levels where encumbrance becomes less a concern, AC becomes less important, so the tradeoff seems ill-advised in most campaigns.

All that ignores the fact that animated shields are relatively cheap and available, in most campaigns, allowing for the best attack routine without losing out on any AC at all.

[Kaeso]

I believe that the reason a 2 hander is better than 2 one handers is that power attack is better with a two hander. True shield is considered worse than 2 one handers, but using a shield as a weapon just makes it as good as 2 one handers and still worse than a 2 hander.

Also with one 2 handed weapon you only have to pay to enchant one weapon.

That's true, but you can also power attack with two weapons, giving you two sources of massive damage. If you take a two level dip in bloodclaw master, you discard the penalties of fighting with two weapons, which means you have two more points on both weapons to use on power attack.

Say a human warblade uses a greataxe to power attack, substracting 3 points (without shock trooper shenenigans), which means his damage is 1d12+6 = 12 per attack on average and 18 per attack on its maximum

Say a dwarven warblade with a bloodclaw master dip uses a light, spiked shield and a dwarven waraxe to power attack, substracting 3 points on both of his attacks, which means his damage is (1d4+3)+(1d10+3)= 12 on average and 20 on maximum. Not only does this have the potential to exceed THF on damage, but also allows the dwarven warblade to gain +1 AC.


The first way listed involves spending two feats in order to do less damage than a THF both per hit and per round, in order to increase AC by the smallest available increment. One of those feats (TWF) requires other feats in its chain to remain viable. Most detractors will call that less than optimal for their preferred playstyle.

The second way listed, again, involves spending feats in a chain in order to do less damage, although marginally more damage than the first way. It's also going to be contingent upon a decent STR and DEX (14+ in both) just to deal with encumbrance concerns. At levels where encumbrance becomes less a concern, AC becomes less important, so the tradeoff seems ill-advised in most campaigns.

All that ignores the fact that animated shields are relatively cheap and available, in most campaigns, allowing for the best attack routine without losing out on any AC at all.

See above for my retort on the first way, but how does the second way involve spending feats? :smallconfused:

[Boci]

Say a human warblade uses a greatsword to power attack, substracting 3 points (without shock trooper shenenigans), which means his damage is 1d12+6 = 12 per attack on average and 18 per attack on its maximum

Say a dwarven warblade with a bloodclaw master dip uses a light, spiked shield and a dwarven waraxe to power attack, substracting 3 points on both of his attacks, which means his damage is (1d4+3)+(1d10+3)= 12 on average and 20 on maximum. Not only does this have the potential to exceed THF on damage, but also allows the dwarven warblade to gain +1 AC.

But the dwarven warblade needs 15 dexterity for two weapon fighting. Also, spicked shields isn't one of the available weapons for blood claw master's abilities to work on. Neither is dwarven axe. And the warblade lost a point of BAB to get that ability (assuming he uses the right weapons.)

[Amphetryon]

That's true, but you can also power attack with two weapons, giving you two sources of massive damage. If you take a two level dip in bloodclaw master, you discard the penalties of fighting with two weapons, which means you have two more points on both weapons to use on power attack.

Say a human warblade uses a greatsword to power attack, substracting 3 points (without shock trooper shenenigans), which means his damage is 1d12+6 = 12 per attack on average and 18 per attack on its maximum

Say a dwarven warblade with a bloodclaw master dip uses a light, spiked shield and a dwarven waraxe to power attack, substracting 3 points on both of his attacks, which means his damage is (1d4+3)+(1d10+3)= 12 on average and 20 on maximum. Not only does this have the potential to exceed THF on damage, but also allows the dwarven warblade to gain +1 AC.



See above for my retort on the first way, but how does the second way involve spending feats? :smallconfused:Power Attack gives much better returns when done two-handed.

Attacking with two weapons means investing in the TWF chain of feats, unless you're presuming magic item availability you haven't specified.

[Kaeso]

But the dwarven warblade needs 15 dexterity for two weapon fighting. Also, spicked shields isn't one of the available weapons for blood claw master's abilities to work on. Neither is dwarven axe. And the warblade lost a point of BAB to get that ability (assuming he uses the right weapons.)

Gah, curses. It seems I was wrong there, then.
I almost thought I had found a way to make sword and board viable :smallfrown:

If I'm allowed to hijack my own thread, I'd like to change the course of this discussion slightly: I'm was mostly trying to defend this tactic because my player in a solo-campaign I'm running wants to play a shield bashing dwarven warblade (actually he's going for warblade1/bard4/warbladeX with dragonfire inspiration shenenigans), and I'm trying to throw him a bone so he doesn't end up too weak to fight CR appropriate monsters. Can you guys suggest:
a) me, as the DM, ways to make him feel useful and powerful in combat, without babying too much with under-CR'd opponents
b) him, as a player, with ways to optimize his chosen martial style as much as possible



Attacking with two weapons means investing in the TWF chain of feats, unless you're presuming magic item availability you haven't specified.

There are items that give you the TWF chain for free:smallconfused:?

[Seerow]

Oh lord here we go again.


The reason the styles you're putting forth are suboptimal is because they both rely on two-weapon fighting. Two-weapon fighting requires a minimum 3 feat investment to be proficient, where two-handed fighting requires nothing. Two-Weapon fighting takes 6-10 feats to be actually decent, while two-handed fighting takes 3 feats to completely blow away anything Two Weapon fighting can do.

Then consider that the two handed fighter can just pick up an animated shield, and have the same AC as your sword and boarder for a little extra gold (unless you invest more into crappy feats to boost your shield), without all the investment required for two-weapon fighting, and you begin to see why two-weapon fighting and sword and board are looked down upon.

[Boci]

Gah, curses. It seems I was wrong there, then.
I almost thought I had found a way to make sword and board viable :smallfrown:

If I'm allowed to hijack my own thread, I'd like to change the course of this discussion slightly: I'm was mostly trying to defend this tactic because my player in a solo-campaign I'm running wants to play a shield bashing dwarven warblade, and I'm trying to throw him a bone so he doesn't end up too weak to fight CR appropriate monsters. Can you guys suggest:
a) me, as the DM, ways to make him feel useful and powerful in combat, without babying too much with under-CR'd opponents
b) him, as a player, with ways to optimize his chosen martial style as much as possible

It depends on the optimization level of the rest of the group. A sword and board warblade is still pretty solid, and if really hard pressed you could wield the sahield in two hands if you really needed that damage bonus.

[Cog]

The Dragonsplit Master build can be adopted for shields, with a little trickery.

Wield two heavy spiked shields made out of Kaorti resin (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20031014a). They are now exotic weapons, and you need EWP to wield them as weapons. That's cool, though, because it's exactly what you want: with that and Weapon Focus (and a few skill points), you now qualify for Exotic Weapon Master. All you need is a single level, to grab Uncanny Blow, letting you get 2H Power Attack returns on a 1H weapon even if it's only held in one hand.

You can have flexibility from here. Since you're holding two of the shields, you can use one for offense and one for defense, and so not have to invest in the Shield Bash line. Alternatively, you can pick up Oversized TWF as well, getting 2H returns on all your attacks, solving the TWF bonus-damage problem.

Hm. You know the saying, "When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail"? I think Exotic Weapon Master has become my hammer. :smallyuk:

[Ravens_cry]

The biggest trouble with sword and board is that in D&D, shields suck like a really large pressure differential. At low levels, sure +2 to AC helps a lot, but it quickly loses lustre.
I wonder if shields would be better represented by a miss-chance against non-touch attacks, say 20% for a large shield, 15% for small, 10% for buckler, and 30% for a tower shield, or is that too much?

[Gwendol]

Isn't the main reason not to use a shield that the AC gained is so poor? There could be a lot of reasons to keep one hand free, and not have to lug a mass of metal or wood around.
Even if you don't use a 2-handed weapon you can still wield a (non-light) weapon 2-handed when needed and get the advantages from PA and extra 1/2 STR bonus damage. With a shield you'll have to contend with bashing.

[Telonius]

Another problem with the Shield Bash combination is that you'd need to pay a pretty heavy feat tax (Improved Shield Bash + TWF + Improved TWF + Greater TWF - which requires lots of Dexterity) no matter how you work it. You run into a variation on one of the typical "Monk Problems": you need to use a Full Attack in order to actually use two-weapon-fighting. While Pounce can help with this, that's another resource you have to spend. A Greatsword-wielding fighter is still going to exceed your damage output, since his Leap Attack bonus is going to be greater.

Also, do note that your Shield has to be Heavy in order for you to apply Power Attack to it. Even with Shield Spikes, a Light Shield is a light weapon. Either you get Power Attack on only one thing (regular weapon yes, light shield no), or you get power attack on both but take -4/-4 to your attacks.

EDIT: Several ninjas eviscerate me from behind while writing out a well thought out post...

[Seerow]

The biggest trouble with sword and board is that in D&D, shields suck like a really large pressure differential. At low levels, sure +2 to AC helps a lot, but it quickly loses lustre.
I wonder if shields would be better represented by a miss-chance against non-touch attacks, say 20% for a large shield, 15% for small, 10% for buckler, and 30% for a tower shield, or is that too much?

Honestly, +2 AC isn't that bad. It is a 10% shift on the d20 towards you not getting hit. This can actually mean a greater than 10% decrease in your likelihood of being hit. (For an extreme example, imagine you were previously being hit on a 1, but just barely. Now a 1 2 and 3 misses. So you effectively tripled your defense there)

The biggest problem is simply the existence of animated shields. They effectively say **** you to anyone who wants to hold a shield, because two handed fighting is just so much more effective, why would you try to two weapon fight with a shield bash when you could simply get an animated shield and do more damage with a lower feat investment?

[Volos]

You can use a shield bash with two hands, making it not only viable for an AC boost source but a good weapon for power attack. This only gets better when you can afford a Heavy Spiked Shield of Bashing, which improves your base damage to better than that of a greatsword for less gold (as base Bashing Shield is cheaper than getting a +1 Heavy Spiked Shield and enchanting the Spikes to be +1 Weapons but also comes with the added benifit of being a free double monkey grip type effect which would be cheesy to obtain any other way) Now you're free to power attack like the insane Frenzied Bezerker you should be while retaining all the benifits of the AC bonus you probably need from Raging and Frenzy-ing in the first place. :smallwink:

[Kaeso]

You can use a shield bash with two hands, making it not only viable for an AC boost source but a good weapon for power attack. This only gets better when you can afford a Heavy Spiked Shield of Bashing, which improves your base damage to better than that of a greatsword for less gold (as base Bashing Shield is cheaper than getting a +1 Heavy Spiked Shield and enchanting the Spikes to be +1 Weapons but also comes with the added benifit of being a free double monkey grip type effect which would be cheesy to obtain any other way) Now you're free to power attack like the insane Frenzied Bezerker you should be while retaining all the benifits of the AC bonus you probably need from Raging and Frenzy-ing in the first place. :smallwink:

Wow, that's actually a pretty funny build and would make for an interesting character concept, a guy that only wears a shield and not a weapon. Maybe a protector of some sorts.... would you mind it if I use this build as an NPC in my campaign?

[Tokiko Mima]

The best use I ever found for shields was in a Dragonfire Adept build, where I used low ASF/mithril armor and lugged around a tower shield to use as cover. That character didn't have a weapon, or any proficiency with armor or shields, so it took a massive penalty to attack rolls. Which was fine by me, considering that my main attack was a breath weapon and I can drop or plant the shield if I needed to use invocations. It made for some awesome DFA tankage/control lockdown, especially with the Entangling Exhalation feat. So more of a Board only build.

[Amphetryon]

You can use a shield bash with two hands, making it not only viable for an AC boost source but a good weapon for power attack. This only gets better when you can afford a Heavy Spiked Shield of Bashing, which improves your base damage to better than that of a greatsword for less gold (as base Bashing Shield is cheaper than getting a +1 Heavy Spiked Shield and enchanting the Spikes to be +1 Weapons but also comes with the added benifit of being a free double monkey grip type effect which would be cheesy to obtain any other way) Now you're free to power attack like the insane Frenzied Bezerker you should be while retaining all the benifits of the AC bonus you probably need from Raging and Frenzy-ing in the first place. :smallwink:

Remember that shields are always referred to as off-hand weapons, RAW, which means you'll have to get DM approval to use them 2-handed or otherwise get full STR benefit from the bash.

[Ravens_cry]

Honestly, +2 AC isn't that bad. It is a 10% shift on the d20 towards you not getting hit. This can actually mean a greater than 10% decrease in your likelihood of being hit. (For an extreme example, imagine you were previously being hit on a 1, but just barely. Now a 1 2 and 3 misses. So you effectively tripled your defense there)

The biggest problem is simply the existence of animated shields. They effectively say **** you to anyone who wants to hold a shield, because two handed fighting is just so much more effective, why would you try to two weapon fight with a shield bash when you could simply get an animated shield and do more damage with a lower feat investment?
It helps, but what you give up is that much more. 1 1/2 on power attacks, with a weapon that almost certainly will have a bigger die, compared to +2 to AC? Besides, unless your AC is really low to start with, you probably should not be fighting something that hits you on anything but a 1 to start with. A miss chance at least scales; it will be useful at low levels and it will still be useful at higher levels.

[agahii]

At one point I considered changing tower shield to give an AC bonus of +1 per point of BAB up to +20 with tower shields and then an amount I adjusted for the other types. I never implemented it because my players exclusively play TWFers, and I had to balance that vrs 2 handed weapons instead.

Is that to much? :)

[Incanur]

All that ignores the fact that animated shields are relatively cheap and available, in most campaigns, allowing for the best attack routine without losing out on any AC at all.

This assumes mid- or high-level play. At low levels, nobody can afford such items and high AC helps significantly. Shields aren't bad at all through the first few levels. They'd probably stay decent over the entire course of an E6 game, though I've yet to try E6 myself.

[riddles]

The shield feats in phb2 did a lot for sword and board - giving you options to trip and daze your opponents, add your shield bonus to your touch ac and giving you twf without the dex requirement but with a feat tax. Have your player have a look at those, then at warblade or crusader. It's not tier 1 but its useful

[Darth Stabber]

Using your shield as a weapon requires extra feat investment if you plan on retaining the AC bonus of the shield, and TWF is already a very feat intensive build. Also Animated shields exist, giving 2H and TWF all the benefits of a shield, without actually having to waste a hand on it.

If you really want to throw out a mass of attack rolls every turn, natural weapons are, IMHO, a far better route. This method requires Improved unarmed strike + something from the following list (usually multiple) + some source of pounce

-Racial: there are several races that give natural weapons, including a few 0LA. Skarn (MoI) have 2 spines, Nezumi (OA) have a bite, Warforged's slam, and those are just off the top of my head.
-Totemist: dip 2 lvls and you can get 1-4 natural weapons and swap them out every day, also has access to pounce, but at lvl 6
-Warshaper: the first level lets you add a natural weapon while you are shapeshifted, while making you immune to crits. Requires some method of shapeshifting
-Bear Warrior: while raging, you are a bear. You gain claw*2 and bite + improved grab, requires Rage + power attack
-Deformity(teeth): Gain a bite attack, as a feat. Requires willing deformity (another feat), and evil alignment.
-Fist of the forest: gain a bite attack during Feral trance (rage lite, that explicitely stacks with rage). Don't remember the reqs, but not too difficult for barbarian and monk.
-Psywar: various psionic powers.
-incarnate and soulborn: With Dragon Magic melds.
-Binder: various vestiges

This list is by no means exhaustive, just from memory.

Also the Multiattack feat is worth consideration.

[Keld Denar]

Agile Shield Fighter (IIRC) lets you make an offhand attack with a heavy shield. Since its 1handed, you get full PA benefit from both hands. Sure, its only one attack (as opposed to GTWF's 3), but it does get the full benefit. A +1 Bashing Heavy Shield + Dwarven Waraxe is a decent combo at mid levels.

But yea...the biggest issue with SnB is the Animated property. That alone breaks all arguements on the risk vs reward of using a shield wide open since you can have your cake and eat it too.

[Greenish]

But yea...the biggest issue with SnB is the Animated property.Well, that and the lack of reach.

[The Glyphstone]

Well, that and the lack of reach.

Greatswords/axes don't get reach either, and they're fairly common. Reach is only essential for trip/control builds, otherwise its only purpose is to counter someone else's reach (weapon or natural).

[HalfDragonCube]

Using your shield as a weapon requires extra feat investment if you plan on retaining the AC bonus of the shield, and TWF is already a very feat intensive build. Also Animated shields exist, giving 2H and TWF all the benefits of a shield, without actually having to waste a hand on it.

Fighters: When you begin to be limited more by your number of appendages than your amount of feats, that is a hint it is time to multiclass.

[Valameer]

Animated shields render all other options obsolete.

[Chronos]

The best change to the shield rules I've seen is to have shields add your Dex bonus again to AC (up to some limit depending on the shield). For instance, a buckler would have no inherent bonus, but would let you add your full Dex bonus, while a small shield gives +1 AC by itself, and lets you add up to 3 points of Dex bonus. This way, not only do shields become viable for some (though not all) characters, but which kind of shield is best also varies from character to character.

[HalfDragonCube]

Animated shields Wizards render all other options obsolete.

Fixed that for you.

[Greenish]

Greatswords/axes don't get reach either, and they're fairly common. Reach is only essential for trip/control builds, otherwise its only purpose is to counter someone else's reach (weapon or natural).Reach is the king of the battlefield. I'd argue it's essential to anyone interested in melee but lacking suicidal tendencies.

[Valameer]

Fixed that for you.

Heheh, this is what I love about the 3.X board. :smallbiggrin:

[The Glyphstone]

Reach is the king of the battlefield. I'd argue it's essential to anyone interested in melee but lacking suicidal tendencies.

Unless you only fight other tripping builds, it's far from essential - the worst you suffer from a non-tripper is one AoO, which primary meleers are going to be able to soak unless it's something way over-CRed. It's full attacks from enemies that are the primary bane of melee combatants without pounce.

Reach is king only because there are two effective types of non-ToB warriors - uberchargers and controlling trippers, and the latter are more common in actual play because of the perceived 'cheese factor' from doing hundreds of damage on a charge.

[HalfDragonCube]

Reach Battlefield control spells are the joint king of the battlefield. I'd argue it's essential to anyone interested in melee but lacking suicidal tendencies.

Fixed that for you as well.

[Boci]

Fixed that for you as well.

Can you name a battlefield control spell that replicates reach + thicket of blades + standstill?

[The Glyphstone]

Can you name a battlefield control spell that replicates reach + thicket of blades + standstill?

Solid Fog? Acid Fog? Black Tentacles?

Actually, those are better than reach+thicket+Standstill, because you can do it from a further distance away...

[Greenish]

Can you name a battlefield control spell that replicates reach + thicket of blades + standstill?Wall of Force? :smalltongue:

[HalfDragonCube]

Solid Fog? Acid Fog? Black Tentacles?

Actually, those are better than reach+thicket+Standstill, because you can do it from a further distance away...

I would 'fix' black tentacles with spiked tentacles of forced intrusion but I had this mental image of someone turning up at the door, saying 'Hi, I'm from the internet' and punching me in the face.

[Greenish]

Unless you only fight other tripping builds, it's far from essential - the worst you suffer from a non-tripper is one AoO, which primary meleers are going to be able to soak unless it's something way over-CRed. It's full attacks from enemies that are the primary bane of melee combatants without pounce.

Reach is king only because there are two effective types of non-ToB warriors - uberchargers and controlling trippers, and the latter are more common in actual play because of the perceived 'cheese factor' from doing hundreds of damage on a charge.Well, lack of reach has almost gotten Sterling (the guy in my avatar) killed a time or two, and the campaign hasn't run for that long.

Hence he'll be getting a pair of kusari-gamas at the earliest opportunity. :smallcool:

[HalfDragonCube]

The thing about uberchargers and megatrippers is that they still get done in by flight. (Leap attack notwithstanding, a little)

Reach<Ubercharger<Megatripper

but

Megatripper< Reach

and

Spellcaster < Everything

Imagine a sort of scissors-paper-stone-LAZOR of fighters.

[The Glyphstone]

...swap some of your arrows around.:smallwink: As written, Spellcasters are worse than everything...

[Darth Stabber]

Reach is the king of the battlefield. I'd argue it's essential to anyone interested in melee but lacking suicidal tendencies.

Now I will admit shocktrooper based ubercharging seems suicidal since you are subtracting your BAB from your AC and have the AC penalty from charging, and from rage, but given the hitdie size of the classes used, and the constitution scores typically involved, there is little danger, infact there is virtually 0 risk of your target attacking you on it's next turn, and you may have attacks left over to kill the target's buddies too (especially true for kungfu bears).

[HalfDragonCube]

Now I will admit shocktrooper based ubercharging seems suicidal since you are subtracting your BAB from your AC and have the AC penalty from charging, and from rage, but given the hitdie size of the classes used, and the constitution scores typically involved, there is little danger, infact there is virtually 0 risk of your target attacking you on it's next turn, and you may have attacks left over to kill the target's buddies too (especially true for kungfu bears).

And then you get things like ranged DPS factotums/clerics/whathaveyou. Now you are a suicidal.

[Boci]

Solid Fog? Acid Fog? Black Tentacles

To the best of my knowledge, none of those discriminate between enemy and ally.

[HalfDragonCube]

To the best of my knowledge, none of those discriminate between enemy and ally.

And the downside is...?

Sometimes another player has to take one for the team. If this is violation with spikes, so be it.

[Kalirren]

The easiest way to deal with THF being so much better than sword-and-board is to houserule a nerf to two-handed power attack so that it deals 1x penalty extra damage, not 2x.

[HalfDragonCube]

The easiest way to deal with THF being so much better than sword-and-board is to houserule a nerf to two-handed power attack so that it deals 1x penalty extra damage, not 2x.

Fighters are sucky enough as is. Taking away one of their few friends might push them over the edge.

[Seerow]

Fighters are sucky enough as is. Taking away one of their few friends might push them over the edge.

Honestly even with that nerf you can use feats to bump two handed power attack up to decent levels, an uber charger is still an uber charger even with a one hander's power attack benefits.


That said, I agree that nerfing melee flat out isn't necessarily the best option, but the fact is that THFing is flat out better at its baseline than any other fighting style in every way. THFing gets exclusive access to reach weapons, while maintaining all of its damage. It gets better damage boosting for free than the other styles get from a dozen feats. That is a serious issue.

I recently took up the goal of trying to rebalance the weapon styles by giving them similar power levels with similar investment, you can see that work here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=199946).

[Person_Man]

Have you reviewed the relevant handbook (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=123630)? There are plenty of sword and board options out there that don't require house rules, and playing with the damage numbers slightly isn't going to change the overall power level of the combat style.

[Boci]

And the downside is...?

Sometimes another player has to take one for the team. If this is violation with spikes, so be it.

You just mentioned it. Yes, the spells are powerful. The melee combo still gets a point for its selectivity.

Yes carpet bombing is powerful. Its a better weapon than a hand gun. That doesn't mean a handgun is rendered obsolete by the existence of carpetbombing.

[HalfDragonCube]

You just mentioned it. Yes, the spells are powerful. The melee combo still gets a point for its selectivity.

Yes carpet bombing is powerful. Its a better weapon than a hand gun. That doesn't mean a handgun is rendered obsolete by the existence of carpetbombing.

Now to find some way of combining the two...

[Darth Stabber]

The easiest way to deal with THF being so much better than sword-and-board is to houserule a nerf to two-handed power attack so that it deals 1x penalty extra damage, not 2x.

When you have 2 things that suck, and one sucks worse, the solution is not make them both equally super crap, you make the worse one better. If one of your kids breaks his arm, do you break you other kid's arm so it will be "fair"?

Simply give primary hand a PA ratio of 3 damage:2penalty.

MAKING FIGHTER WORSE IS NOT A "RULES FIX"

[Boci]

Now to find some way of combining the two...

Sculp spell (and to a lesser extent extraordinary spell aim) is the closest I can think of, but I'm drunk, so my gaming knowledge is probably reduced.

I'm pretty sure in 3.5, listing allies in a spell's target is limited AoE buffs. 4E introduced area of effects that specifiaclly targeted enemies.

[HalfDragonCube]

Sculp spell (and to a lesser extent extraordinary spell aim) is the closest I can think of, but I'm drunk, so my gaming knowledge is probably reduced.

I'm pretty sure in 3.5, listing allies in a spell's target is limited AoE buffs. 4E introduced area of effects that specifiaclly targeted enemies.

I thought of that, but then I got sidetracked onto theories about what happens if you use it on Grease.

Also, great multitasking you got there. You spelling is right and everything. (More or less)

[Keld Denar]

Extraordinary Spell Aim and the Archmage's Mastery of Shaping abilities both allow you to omit squares. Also, Spellguard Rings from Complete Mage allow you to make one ally immune to up to 3 of your spells per day. Of course, that only works for spells that allow SR, which Black Tentacles and Solid Fog do not (unless you are a Shadowcraft Mage).

[Kalirren]

When you have 2 things that suck, and one sucks worse, the solution is not make them both equally super crap, you make the worse one better. If one of your kids breaks his arm, do you break you other kid's arm so it will be "fair"?

Simply give primary hand a PA ratio of 3 damage:2penalty.

MAKING FIGHTER WORSE IS NOT A "RULES FIX"

Making the worse one better isn't the same as making the weaker one more powerful. Weakening TH-PA doesn't just fix THF vs. sword-and-board; it also fixes THF vs. TWF and melee vs. ranged. It makes all of the fighter options more viable with respect to each other and to other tier 4 classes.

If you're trying to play someone who does HP damage in a game which has full casters, you have a problem of mixing tiers. Neither weakening THF nor buffing einhander combat is going to fix that.

[Darth Stabber]

Making the worse one better isn't the same as making the weaker one more powerful. Weakening TH-PA doesn't just fix THF vs. sword-and-board; it also fixes THF vs. TWF and melee vs. ranged. It makes all of the fighter options more viable with respect to each other and to other tier 4 classes.

Given that all fighter builds are terrible when compared to tier 3, and the general consensus is that tier 3 is where to be, you should provide a method that brings the weak options up, not push the one that is closest to good down into the monk pit. Besides, TWF is for rogues.

[Seerow]

Given that all fighter builds are terrible when compared to tier 3, and the general consensus is that tier 3 is where to be, you should provide a method that brings the weak options up, not push the one that is closest to good down into the monk pit. Besides, TWF is for rogues.

Well the point he's making is you can boost all of the styles as much as you want, that alone won't push the Fighter, or anyone else up a tier. Similarly, nerfing THFing isn't going to nerf anybody down a tier.

The fighter needs more options and versatility, the raw damage gained from THFing/Charging is nice, but if used to its full extent breaks the game anyway. If you want to fix Fighters and other martial types, first you balance the weapon styles against each other, then you provide more flexibility and options for those character to use. All of the martial classes need more mobility, stronger standard action effects, and things to do besides causing damage.

Not just that, out of combat utility options are desperately needed more than anything. Skill tricks are a nice start, but they should be broader, giving more awesome effects for high level ones, and should be more easily obtainable.


Anyway, I'm rambling. The point is that charging is good, too good. Ubercharger is overpowered, two handed fighting is too strong relative to other options at similar investment. Just flat out nerfing THFing isn't the answer, but just buffing the other styles doesn't fix it either... the thing needed is more flexibility, and the only way THFing succeeds there is in being mostly accessible to anyone with 2-3 feats.

[Zaq]

Anecdotally, I've found that shields are awesome in E6. I have cursed my lack of reach once or twice, but my shield has kept my E6 Incarnate alive in more than a few fights.

Of course, he's also an Ironsoul Forgemaster whose shield makes him almost functionally immune to any sort of energy damage you're going to run into in E6, but even BEFORE he got that ability, +2 AC makes a really big difference when you're fighting monsters with to-hit bonuses in the 5-10 range.

[MeeposFire]

I like two handing a heavy spiked shield. Yea animated is still better but I tend to play in games that do not allow that (plus I feel it is very cheesy). Then it has a similar level as a greatsword and a buckler with the same feat cost and bashing is cheap.

[Greenish]

given the hitdie size of the classes used, and the constitution scores typically involved, there is little danger, infact there is virtually 0 risk of your target attacking you on it's next turn, and you may have attacks left over to kill the target's buddies too (especially true for kungfu bears).Next turn is not what you need to worry about, but this one. Large+ critter uses the AoO (which basically autohits) to start grapple, suddenly you can't use your big two-hander no more.

That's without going into Braced for Charge, Hold the Line, Combat Reflexes, Stand Still, Steadfast Boots pikemen. :smalltongue:

[Rejakor]

At low levels(>6), it's worth it for a Crusader to go full plate + tower shield. Also, Knights. But knights suck. And yet every time I go tower shield at low levels, I find myself wishing I had a glaive, instead. With monkey grip you can (poorly) combine the two, but meh. It's just not useful enough.


The only use i've ever gotten out of non-animated shields was when I built a monk (a tome monk) around 2-handing a heavy steel shield using the Agile Shield Charge feat + Improved Trip + Pounce to double my attacks on a charge with it. Which was fun. Bashing etc. Not amazing. But fun. Mostly because I was using the shield as a masterwork parkour tool (sledding and taking impacts on it, hooking it onto stuff) the whole time.

[Greenish]

And yet every time I go tower shield at low levels, I find myself wishing I had a glaive, instead. With monkey grip you can (poorly) combine the two, but meh. It's just not useful enough.No, you can't. Monkey Grip doesn't work that way.

Now, diopsid, on the other hand…


using the Agile Shield Charge featDo you mean Agile Shield Fighter, Shield Charge, or perhaps both?

[Rejakor]

No, you can't. Monkey Grip doesn't work that way.

Now, diopsid, on the other hand…

Spinning sword or kusari-gama your way out of it is mainly what I meant.


Do you mean Agile Shield Fighter, Shield Charge, or perhaps both?

Yes.

[Zaq]

At low levels(>6), it's worth it for a Crusader to go full plate + tower shield.

Iron Guard's Glare comes online at level 1. For a Crusader, it is absolutely worth it to increase your reach at any cost, at least if you want to be using any sort of BfC (which the Crusader does quite well indeed).

[Darth Stabber]

Well the point he's making is you can boost all of the styles as much as you want, that alone won't push the Fighter, or anyone else up a tier. Similarly, nerfing THFing isn't going to nerf anybody down a tier.

The fighter needs more options and versatility, the raw damage gained from THFing/Charging is nice, but if used to its full extent breaks the game anyway. If you want to fix Fighters and other martial types, first you balance the weapon styles against each other, then you provide more flexibility and options for those character to use. All of the martial classes need more mobility, stronger standard action effects, and things to do besides causing damage.

Not just that, out of combat utility options are desperately needed more than anything. Skill tricks are a nice start, but they should be broader, giving more awesome effects for high level ones, and should be more easily obtainable.


Anyway, I'm rambling. The point is that charging is good, too good. Ubercharger is overpowered, two handed fighting is too strong relative to other options at similar investment. Just flat out nerfing THFing isn't the answer, but just buffing the other styles doesn't fix it either... the thing needed is more flexibility, and the only way THFing succeeds there is in being mostly accessible to anyone with 2-3 feats.

There is a solution for the fact that melee sucks, It's even official material. If you want meleers to be more than one trick ponies, play ToB. Seriously, the late 3.5 material does a lot to balance the game, and ToB is the biggest rules patch for the edition. If given content in a couple more books (and maybe a complete), There could be a couple extra classes (maybe some that people don't scream weabo at), and a few more disciples (hopefully an archery one, maybe two), there could be more serious talk of mundane melee being more viable. Fighter however has been replaced (except for dipping)

[Rejakor]

Iron Guard's Glare comes online at level 1. For a Crusader, it is absolutely worth it to increase your reach at any cost, at least if you want to be using any sort of BfC (which the Crusader does quite well indeed).

Well the basic idea is that you have a shield for Shield Block and for synergy with your Iron Guard's Glare at lower levels, and then you switch it up for a reach weapon and spiked gauntlets/armour spikes/boot/braid blades when Thicket Of Blades comes online. I also like to pick up Stand Still at about that point.

[Seharvepernfan]

I made this partly to make sword and board an effective combat style, and also to give light shields a reason to exist.

Parry
Pre: Bab +1
Benefit: Whenever you are targeted by anything that requires an attack roll that isn't a ranged touch or a ray, you can expend an attack of opportunity to try to parry the attack. This functions as an opposed attack roll. You must declare that you are parrying before you know the result of their attack roll. If your attack roll is higher than theirs, you parry the attack. You cannot make more parries in any one round than you have attacks in a full attack action. Your first parry in a round uses your full attack bonus, the second uses your first iterative attack, and so on.

If you are fighting with two weapons, you may parry with either at your discretion and may make as many parries as you have attacks with both weapons up to your max number of AoO‘s per round (they reset at the end of your turn). If you are hasted or are using a weapon with the speed enchancement, you gain an extra parry each round (up to your max number of AoO's).

For each size category larger than yours a weapon is, you suffer a -2 penalty to your parry roll (shields are considered one size larger for this purpose). If your opponent is using power attack, you take a penalty to your parry roll equal to the bonus damage the opponent receives from power attack (if you are parrying with a shield or a weapon held in two hands, this penalty is halved, round down, minimum 1). If you use combat expertise while parrying, you also gain the ac bonus to your parry roll.

If you are two weapon fighting with a shield via improved shield bash and you use your shield to make a parry, you gain its shield bonus to armor and its enhancement bonus (or just MW) if its enhanced as a weapon to your attack, and you lower the two weapon fighting penalty by two. You cannot use a currently animated animating shield to parry.

If you are using combat expertise, you gain the bonus to armor class to your parry roll (but the attack penalty to any ripostes you make).

You can only make one parry attempt for each enemy attack roll. You have to be aware of an attack to parry it, though you can parry flat-footed because of combat reflexes (but not use riposte).

Any round in which you parry, for every parry attempt you make with a given weapon, you suffer a cumulative -2 penalty to all attacks made with that weapon during your next turn.

You cannot parry a riposte with the weapon parried.

Improved Parry
Pre: Parry
Benefit: Any size penalty your weapon/shield receives when parrying a larger weapon is lessened by 2.

Riposte
Pre: Dex 13+, Parry
Benefit: Whenever you parry an attack, you can expend another AoO and attack that enemy at the same attack bonus as the parry roll. You cannot make a riposte on your turn.

It works well for rangers, because they dont have to have high dex to twf. I haven't worked all the kinks out yet, but Im close.

[Leon]

I almost thought I had found a way to make sword and board viable :smallfrown:


Everything is Viable if it does what you want it to.

[Scow2]

Why do people think you need Two-Weapon fighting for sword+Board?

The feat Agile Shield Fighter, while it does require Shield Specialization, gives pretty much the same benefit, without the need for a high DEX, doesn't it?