Buckler & Bow: Reasoning

[gooddragon1]

xxxxxxxxxxxx

[Waker]

Hmm, that's interesting. Never really paid a great deal of attention to bucklers, but I suppose that's a small advantage to archers.

[Fouredged Sword]

A +5 buckler is a nice +6 ac bonus for archers. Good job spotting this. Lets see if someone pokes a hole in this. I'd like to use this in a game if it works.

[Seharvepernfan]

I always assumed this.

[Slipperychicken]

Congratulations. Stick a Wand Chamber on your Buckler (as well as your bow), and use something like Hunter's Mercy or Nerveskitter (+5 initiative is nothing to sneeze at). Get a nice-looking armor crystal, pop it into the shield. Save cash on enchantments by slapping them onto the shield instead.


If it's legal, slap shield spikes onto it, enchant those with Smoking (Concealment is always nice) or Eager+Warning for another +5 initiative. So yeah, among other things, you can get a competitively-cheap (~10k?) +10 initiative out of it.

[Deophaun]

If it's legal, slap shield spikes onto it, enchant those with Smoking (Concealment is always nice) or Eager+Warning for another +5 initiative. So yeah, among other things, you can get a competitively-cheap (~10k?) +10 initiative out of it.
Unfortunately you can't use shield spikes on a buckler. You could, however, use a dwarven buckler-axe from Races of Stone.

[Ashtagon]

Yes, it's RAW legal. Have fun with it.

I don't allow this in my campaigns though, because real-world bucklers don't work the way RAW says they work.

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

sure, real world bucklers don't work like this. However, it was very common for archers to have a shield that exactly matches the description of the Buckler, as is in the CRB. Worn on the forearm, etc.

In any case, it certainly isnt game breaking to allow it.

[Ashtagon]

sure, real world bucklers don't work like this. However, it was very common for archers to have a shield that exactly matches the description of the Buckler, as is in the CRB. Worn on the forearm, etc.

In any case, it certainly isnt game breaking to allow it.

It was very common for archers to have a leather bracer worn on the arm. This was sturdy enough to protect against whiplash from the bowstring. Nothing more.

Trust me, I'm a toxophilite.

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

Shields (http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_shield.html)

yeah. Persian archers were known to use shields strapped their bow arm.

Macedonian Pelta were shields strapped to the arm to free up the hands to use a pike.

a link (http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=25296)

another link (http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=23240)

yet another link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lantern_shield)

oh hey, another link! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Targe)

and yet another link, that clearly describes "arab" archery in great detail, as it is a translated 15th century manuscript. In it, describes the use of a shield strapped to the forearm. (www.tuba-archery.com/article/arab-archery.pdf)

I suck at archery, but it took only a few minutes to find all of this. In that vein, I myself am an excellent marksman, (especially with a pistol) but I would never claim that makes me an expert on its history, or to its uses in medieval combat.

[Garan]

Just as another source: Many Mongolian horse archers wore buckler-like shields on their forearm.

[Ashtagon]

Just as another source: Many Mongolian horse archers wore buckler-like shields on their forearm.

Just so you know, when you identify something as another source, it is traditional to give a cite. Otherwise, it's simply a case of "he said, she said".

@Duncan_Ruadrik: I'll go through your links this evening.

[Monodominant]

Yes, it's RAW legal. Have fun with it.

I don't allow this in my campaigns though, because real-world bucklers don't work the way RAW says they work.

Real world stuff dont work as described in the game?

Well thats a first!

I mean I thought that wearing a REALLY HEAVY ARMOR restricting my movements made it HARDER for people to hit me!

[Pilo]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon View Post
Yes, it's RAW legal. Have fun with it.

I don't allow this in my campaigns though, because real-world bucklers don't work the way RAW says they work.
Real world stuff dont work as described in the game?

Well thats a first!

I mean I thought that wearing a REALLY HEAVY ARMOR restricting my movements made it HARDER for people to hit me!

You mean i can turn into a huge 15-head hydra in real world?

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

@Duncan_Ruadrik: I'll go through your links this evening.

Just so you know, not all of my links reference archery, most merely show examples of shields that permit the use of the shield hand.

[Slipperychicken]

Real world stuff dont work as described in the game?

Well thats a first!

I mean I thought that wearing a REALLY HEAVY ARMOR restricting my movements made it HARDER for people to hit me!

It's not so much "hit" as "connect". I like to think that if you get over the guy's touch AC, but below his regular AC, you hit, but didn't really connect (i.e. it bounced off his really heavy armor).

[jackattack]

I disagree that the AC bonus applies while using a bow or crossbow.

The distinction between (cross)bows and other weapons only refers to penalties to weapon-use while carrying a "buckler".

Using a weapon with the off hand or wielding a two-handed weapon "in any case" negates the AC bonus of the "buckler". And a (cross)bow (other than the exotic one-handed crossbow "pistol") absolutely requires two hands.

The advantage of the buckler is that it doesn't have to be equipped -- it's ready for use without delay.

[Ashtagon]

Shields (http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_shield.html)

yeah. Persian archers were known to use shields strapped their bow arm.

Macedonian Pelta were shields strapped to the arm to free up the hands to use a pike.

a link (http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=25296)

another link (http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=23240)

yet another link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lantern_shield)

oh hey, another link! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Targe)

and yet another link, that clearly describes "arab" archery in great detail, as it is a translated 15th century manuscript. In it, describes the use of a shield strapped to the forearm. (www.tuba-archery.com/article/arab-archery.pdf)

I suck at archery, but it took only a few minutes to find all of this. In that vein, I myself am an excellent marksman, (especially with a pistol) but I would never claim that makes me an expert on its history, or to its uses in medieval combat.

Your first link notes that many archers of Medieval Europe did indeed carry bucklers -- as back-up weapons to be used in conjunction with swords in case they were forced into melee.

I was aware of the Macedonian pelta. In my game, I treat it as a light wooden shield that can be used in-hand as a light shield, or allowed to hang off the shoulder and provide +1 AC while freeing the hand.

The Scottish targe almost matches the D&D bucker, but notably it also has a hand-grip, which is against the description of the game item. Even so, the first link does note that a dagger can be used in the hand. I guess I could reasonably allow light weapons only to be used with it; there's no record of anything heavier being used with the targe.

The "lantern shields" are exactly analogous to the dwarven axe-shield, gnome tortoise-shield, and similar "shield+weapon" devices. I'm happy to allow them in my games (where they fit the local culture of course; armourers won't make them where demand or know-how doesn't exist). However, they aren't an example of a shield that leaves the hand free. they are an example of a shield with an integrated weapon. Or, if you like, a weapon that has an integrated shield.

Didn't read the last link. At 114 pages, there really isn't time to read through it all and give a reasoned response in under a week. Was there a specific chapter you had in mind?

A keyword search for "shield" suggests page 56 has some relevant data. The correct stance for using bow and shield as described seems to match what I instinctively did when I did archery (and for which my club coach repeatedly criticised me for). Nonetheless, I can't see how that stance would enable a shield, and illustrations seem to be lacking.


Real world stuff dont work as described in the game?

Well thats a first!

I mean I thought that wearing a REALLY HEAVY ARMOR restricting my movements made it HARDER for people to hit me!

An attack roll isn't a roll to hit. It's a roll to hit hard enough to cause hit point loss. And hit points too are a rather nebulous concept, more akin to "plot armour" than to actual ability to sustain damage. In that regard, whether the AC comes from having a hard surface (armour) or being able to move out of the way (good Dex bonus) is a moot point. What matters is whether you possess some quality that enables you to avoid the hit point damage.

In fact, an attack could actually miss (fail to make contact entirely), but the target suffer hit point loss due to the effort (stamina, spiritual, shock, etc.) spent avoiding the hit itself. That's the most reasonable way to explain how mid-level fighters can routinely survive a dozen arrow "hits". Either that, or they were only flesh wounds.


You mean i can turn into a huge 15-head hydra in real world?

No one expects stuff that is evidently unreal by its very concept from working as in real life. But suspension of disbelief requires that objects that actually exist in real life should function in game more or less as they do in real life.

[Spiryt]

As long as shield is securely strapped to the forearm and/or shoulder one can use this arm to pretty much whatever purpose, including shooting a bow.

It's hard to find any depictions or descriptions of it though - probably because it wasn't really practical, especially pointless with buckler size shield.



The Scottish targe almost matches the D&D bucker, but notably it also has a hand-grip,

Actually, unlike most of other shields that size, scottish targes were mostly strapped on forearm, many didn't even have any central grip. One could easily hold dagger etc. in shield arm.

The way I can see TS point, there's indeed no reason to not use buckler with bow of crossbow though...

Pretty clunky, as many things in 3.5, but it can be re-fluffed fairly easily if someone wants, so I would definitely allow it like that - bow etc. are already pretty underpowered without certain builds.

[gooddragon1]

I disagree that the AC bonus applies while using a bow or crossbow.

The distinction between (cross)bows and other weapons only refers to penalties to weapon-use while carrying a "buckler".

Using a weapon with the off hand or wielding a two-handed weapon "in any case" negates the AC bonus of the "buckler". And a (cross)bow (other than the exotic one-handed crossbow "pistol") absolutely requires two hands.

The advantage of the buckler is that it doesn't have to be equipped -- it's ready for use without delay.

"In any case, IF you use a weapon in your off hand"

"You can ALSO use your shield arm to wield a weapon"

You are not treated as wielding a weapon in that hand while using a bow or crossbow. Therefore the "in any case" stipulation does not apply as it follows with "if you use a weapon".

[jackattack]

You cannot use a bow or a crossbow without using the "off" hand. Therefore, you are using a weapon in your "off" hand, or using a two-handed weapon.

No matter which way you look at it, if you aim and/or fire a bow or crossbow then the "off" hand (arm) is being used to wield a weapon, not to use the shield.

A "buckler" has to be wielded to be effective (without magical bonuses, which I'd also debate). When using a bow or crossbow, the disc is held out from the body and at the wrong angle to protect the wearer. When held in a position to block an attack, the arm is in the wrong position to use a bow or crossbow.

-----

Does anyone know the proper term for the kind of shield we are talking about? A buckler is a small shield with a handhold and no strap, used to parry (similar to a main gauche).

[Spiryt]

In 3.5, buckler is 'small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm', and that's all what really matters here.

Smallish shield strapped to forearm can be generally called 'target', but this can get complicated real quick.

[gooddragon1]

You cannot use a bow or a crossbow without using the "off" hand. Therefore, you are using a weapon in your "off" hand, or using a two-handed weapon.

No matter which way you look at it, if you aim and/or fire a bow or crossbow then the "off" hand (arm) is being used to wield a weapon, not to use the shield.

A "buckler" has to be wielded to be effective (without magical bonuses, which I'd also debate). When using a bow or crossbow, the disc is held out from the body and at the wrong angle to protect the wearer. When held in a position to block an attack, the arm is in the wrong position to use a bow or crossbow.

-----

Does anyone know the proper term for the kind of shield we are talking about? A buckler is a small shield with a handhold and no strap, used to parry (similar to a main gauche).

No. You're using the off hand but you are not using a weapon in it. The bow string does not count as a weapon. If you read the entry carefully it treats it as an excluding case. It doesn't have to make sense. It's RAW. If you want to use logic and say that it doesn't make sense then neither does taking a ladder and splitting it into 2 ten foot poles but here we are.

Simple: It says you can also use that hand to wield a weapon. Thus if you are using a bow you are not using it as a weapon in that hand because you are choosing to use the other hand to manipulate the bow string. The word "also" is the key here as it means that using the bow or crossbow is not treated as using a weapon in that hand. Again, you can complain and houserule all you want, but RAW it is allowed.

Lastly, if you want to go with: It's a two handed weapon and you're using it to help... that's also covered: "You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon)."

In the same sentence no less.

[jackattack]

But that only addresses attack penalties, not AC. If you are going RAW, it doesn't actually say whether the AC bonus does or doesn't apply while a bow or crossbow is in use. Which leaves us with logic, or sense, or house rules.

I would not allow a character to attack and defend with the same hand at the same time.

[gooddragon1]

But that only addresses attack penalties, not AC. If you are going RAW, it doesn't actually say whether the AC bonus does or doesn't apply while a bow or crossbow is in use. Which leaves us with logic, or sense, or house rules.

I would not allow a character to attack and defend with the same hand at the same time.

Underlined is house ruling.

It absolutely allows AC to remain and here's why:

You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon)

This treats the bow or crossbow as an exemption to the case of being a weapon used in the off hand or even being helped by the off hand.

In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you don’t get the buckler’s AC bonus for the rest of the round.

The bolded stipulates the case where you don't get the AC.

You are exempted from that case when using a bow or crossbow.

End of story.

[Ashtagon]

...The bow string does not count as a weapon...

By that logic, neither is the handle of an axe. Which means you could use a great axe in the same hand as a tower shield :smallbiggrin:

[Lonely Tylenol]

gooddragon1, I'm rooting for you here, but:


Longbow
You need at least two hands to use a bow, regardless of its size. A longbow is too unwieldy to use while you are mounted. If you have a penalty for low Strength, apply it to damage rolls when you use a longbow. If you have a bonus for high Strength, you can apply it to damage rolls when you use a composite longbow (see below) but not a regular longbow.

I checked to confirm that every single bow has that sentence at the very beginning. This means that you do use a bow in two hands, i.e. use your off-hand to wield a bow, which causes it to fall once again under the "if you use a weapon in your off hand" clause.

[jackattack]

You acknowledge that the hand holding the (cross)bow is in use, but you still want the AC bonus. Would you allow the AC bonus if that hand was opening a door, or turning a winch, or holding a rope?

RAW, it makes the distinction for attack penalties, and nothing else. End of story.

[gooddragon1]

You acknowledge that the hand holding the (cross)bow is in use, but you still want the AC bonus. Would you allow the AC bonus if that hand was opening a door, or turning a winch, or holding a rope?

RAW, it makes the distinction for attack penalties, and nothing else. End of story.

Doesn't matter whether or not I'd allow it. RAW it's an exception. Actually, as you may note, it is a specific exemption in the case of a buckler for only bows and crossbows.

Okay, let's see if I can narrow it down for you.

Perfectly RAW it says while carrying (not while wielding). However, in the next sentence because of the word "also" and the words following it there are two cases where the bow or crossbow are treated as not being those cases. Those two cases are: as being a weapon in the off hand & as being assisted in wielding by the off hand. The first case is extremely important for this next part: if you use a weapon in your off hand. Regardless of what the longbow entry or any other crossbow entry says, the bow or crossbow (for the purpose of the buckler) is treated as an exemption. Thus, for the purpose of the buckler AC, you are not treated as using a weapon in the off hand or even assisting with the off hand regardless of what the case may actually be. Furthermore, that penalty on attack rolls is an additional exemption as it only applies to the "also" case that grants the exception which I use in the second part.

Bottom Line: No attack penalty & keep AC when using a bow or crossbow of any kind.

[Lonely Tylenol]

OK, then. Let's try this again from a different angle.

"Not gaining a bonus" =/= "incurring a penalty".

The first line of the quoted text carves out an explicit exemption for bows and crossbows... To the -1 penalty to attack rolls, because that is a penalty.

What it does not do, however, is exempt the bow and crossbow from the last sentence of the paragraph, because "you don't get the bonus AC" is not a penalty. It's a qualifier for a bonus that you don't meet... Which you explicitly don't meet because all bows, regardless of size, are wielded in two hands.

[gooddragon1]

OK, then. Let's try this again from a different angle.

"Not gaining a bonus" =/= "incurring a penalty".

The first line of the quoted text carves out an explicit exemption for bows and crossbows... To the -1 penalty to attack rolls, because that is a penalty.

What it does not do, however, is exempt the bow and crossbow from the last sentence of the paragraph, because "you don't get the bonus AC" is not a penalty. It's a qualifier for a bonus that you don't meet... Which you explicitly don't meet because all bows, regardless of size, are wielded in two hands.

Not quite. It does two things, firstly it does what you stated with the penalty. The other thing it does is show that using a bow or crossbow doesn't count as using the hand for an off hand weapon or to assist for the purpose of the buckler. That is why the last part doesn't apply with the AC loss.

Also, note that I am not "after" you. I'm a bit frustrated with Jack though.

[deuxhero]

Note you only lose the Buckler's Shield bonus to AC (a mere 1). Your enchantments (both special and Enchantment bonus) are kept. If some special material that a buckler could be made out of gave a special benefit, you would keep that too.

[Invader]

I honestly don't see the argument for not allowing the bonus while using a bow. It was obviously intended for that sole purpose and I'd say the wording is pretty clear. Whats the point of saying you can use a bow if you wouldn't get the bonus from the buckler to begin with?

[Deadlights]

I honestly don't see the argument for not allowing the bonus while using a bow. It was obviously intended for that sole purpose and I'd say the wording is pretty clear. Whats the point of saying you can use a bow if you wouldn't get the bonus from the buckler to begin with?

I believe the idea is that blocking with a shield requires a specific blocking technique to be effective, which cannot be performed while firing a weapon as the motion needed to fire a bow/crossbow is completely different than a blocking stance.

The buckler seems to be meant either for holding a ranged weapon but choosing to go defensive (for whatever reason) or for those who fire a ranged weapon then switch to a melee weapon without having to take the time to equip a shield. You could also take a -2 to fire a light crossbow one handed while defending with a buckler, not that you would ever want to.

[Invader]

I wouldn't totally disagree but watch someone fighting with a regular shield and sword. Generally you're not blocking with a shield when you're swinging a sword. You swing and then bring the shield back to a defensive position until you swing again. And yes you can maintain a blocking position with a shield while attacking and there are even some styles that promote fighting that way but not all of them.

[Deadlights]

I wouldn't totally disagree but watch someone fighting with a regular shield and sword. Generally you're not blocking with a shield when you're swinging a sword. You swing and then bring the shield back to a defensive position until you swing again. And yes you can maintain a blocking position with a shield while attacking and there are even some styles that promote fighting that way but not all of them.

I don't disagree with you, I am mostly playing devil's advocate.

[Invader]

I don't disagree with you, I am mostly playing devil's advocate.

All I read was "I work for the devil" LOL :smallbiggrin:

[TuggyNE]

Note you only lose the Buckler's Shield bonus to AC (a mere 1). Your enchantments (both special and Enchantment bonus) are kept. If some special material that a buckler could be made out of gave a special benefit, you would keep that too.

Unfortunately this is not the case; enhancement bonuses on armor are applied as part of the shield or armor bonus, and are denied when they are.

It's funny, I started reading this thread fairly sure that bucklers should definitely work with bows, by RAW and RAI, but now I am no longer confident, and that makes me sad.

Ah well, animated heavy shields to the rescue... again....

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

or just borrow Pathfinder rules (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/armor/buckler) and let it work. OMG, its so overpowerdz, now my ranger archer will winz all battlez!!!1!11!one

oh wait... Wizards can use a mithril buckler at no penalty while casting spells, and they already break the game more thoroughly than anyone who actually cares about rules involving buckler and bow interactions.

EDIT: oh, and I would prefer bending rules over animated shields, which are lame and completely unheroic. only pansies use animated shields.

[deuxhero]

Unfortunately this is not the case; enhancement bonuses on armor are applied as part of the shield or armor bonus, and are denied when they are.

It's funny, I started reading this thread fairly sure that bucklers should definitely work with bows, by RAW and RAI, but now I am no longer confident, and that makes me sad.

Ah well, animated heavy shields to the rescue... again....

You still keep your special enchantments.

[Tyndmyr]

sure, real world bucklers don't work like this. However, it was very common for archers to have a shield that exactly matches the description of the Buckler, as is in the CRB. Worn on the forearm, etc.

In any case, it certainly isnt game breaking to allow it.

This. It's remarkably common in modern day larping as well, for the same reasons. Little extra protection, not a big hindrance to archery. I've always just assumed this was legit.

If you prefer the bracer option, dastana works exactly the same way for light armor, and even provides a shield bonus. Different look, same mechanical effect. Also, avoids any worries over RAW ridiculousness.

[Fitz10019]

I asked about this ages ago in the RAW thread. Part of the answer was that "two-handed weapon" is specifically a melee weapon category. The main answer was that archers can use bucklers and they keep the AC without incurring attack penalties. I think that's RAW and RAI, but everyone's welcome to houserule as they wish.

[Ashtagon]

This. It's remarkably common in modern day larping as well, for the same reasons. Little extra protection, not a big hindrance to archery. I've always just assumed this was legit.

If you prefer the bracer option, dastana works exactly the same way for light armor, and even provides a shield bonus. Different look, same mechanical effect. Also, avoids any worries over RAW ridiculousness.

Here's what WotC says dastana look like:

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/oa_gallery/Dastana.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/oa_gallery/Dastana.jpg

Curiously, outside of a single link, every single google hit that references dastana as armour is an RPG link. The one exception is the Met Museum (http://www.metmuseum.org/collections/search-the-collections/40012678). Annoyingly, that link lacks any images. While it is identified as "armour", this is equally a museum of art, so it could simply have been a decorative piece.

Is there any definite evidence that dastana were actual armour pieces, and not simply decoration or to protect against bow-strings?

[Invader]

I'd say definitely more armor than an kind of shield.

http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=1366&bih=649&tbm=isch&tbnid=u9T-nqXptshXaM:&imgrefurl=http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showthread.php%3F56180-My-first-talwar!&docid=UoganuXPH2yztM&imgurl=http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%252520Armouries/VA_Dastana_18th_C.jpg&w=635&h=1200&ei=JlvFT4e8NOK36QG7y9zFCg&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=315&sig=118162395622303277111&page=1&tbnh=144&tbnw=77&start=0&ndsp=21&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0,i:76&tx=25&ty=72

http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=1366&bih=649&tbm=isch&tbnid=09spoiGW3PgGFM:&imgrefurl=http://www.kssyxx.com/dz_tushuguan/book/baikezhishi07/029.htm&docid=A_fSV4xyaMM0EM&imgurl=http://www.kssyxx.com/dz_tushuguan/book/baikezhishi07/images/B680.jpg&w=400&h=370&ei=JlvFT4e8NOK36QG7y9zFCg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=771&vpy=336&dur=899&hovh=216&hovw=233&tx=109&ty=168&sig=118162395622303277111&page=1&tbnh=143&tbnw=155&start=0&ndsp=21&ved=1t:429,r:18,s:0,i:112

http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=1366&bih=649&tbm=isch&tbnid=rQDScHeiRj1P7M:&imgrefurl=http://akaalarms.com/&docid=tuVjHC-XyP8zkM&imgurl=http://akaalarms.com/site/wp-content/uploads/bazu-t.jpg&w=220&h=160&ei=JlvFT4e8NOK36QG7y9zFCg&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=359&sig=118162395622303277111&page=2&tbnh=128&tbnw=176&start=21&ndsp=26&ved=1t:429,r:12,s:21,i:146&tx=124&ty=85

[Eldonauran]

I'm with GoodDragon on this one.

Just thought I'd toss my two cents in. :smallamused:

[Namfuak]

It seems to me there are two debates here, one being whether it makes sense by RAW and one being whether it makes sense realistically.

I'll deal with RAW first. Let's start by saying that it seems that everyone agrees that bows are treated as two handed weapons. So, looking at the buckler entry, it would seem to me that the phrase "in any case" starting the sixth sentence would imply that that sentence refers to a situation that is independent of anything that was mentioned before, thus meaning that although there is no attack roll penalty for bows, the mere fact that they are two-handed removes your AC bonus from the shield.

I would probably let my players use get the AC bonus anyway, because archers need love, and also for this reason rebutting the realism argument: At first level through 5th level, archers will generally only fire one or two shots per six seconds. If we imagine that they are firing by basically pulling out an arrow and immediately shooting, it isn't such a stretch that within those six seconds they could also bring their buckler to bear. With rapid shot, they have specifically trained to fire faster, making them able to fire two shots in the time it would normally take to fire one (albeit at a penalty), so the same logic can be applied. Now then, it would seem this logic would not apply to iterative attacks. And you would be very, very wrong. At 6th level, this character is on-par with a bard who can enthrall and command a person through the power of music, a wizard who can make himself fly, a fighter who can hit things especially hard, and a monk who is immune to poison and whose every strike is magical. So, it is fair to say that a 6th level archer would have no trouble adding a second shot to his normal attack while standing mostly still, while still being able to use his shield arm to react to danger. Comparing them at higher levels gives the same result, only more amplified.

[ericgrau]

In other threads there was likewise split opinions on whether "without penalty" means that you don't get the -1 ONLY or if you don't get the -1 AND don't lose AC when attacking. This article clarifies that you do lose the AC bonus when firing the bow: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20050210a (but you don't take the -1). The author is Skip Williams, one of the authors of the Player's Handbook.

I believe there is a feat called improved buckler defense to get around this.

[Metahuman1]

Yes, it's RAW legal. Have fun with it.

I don't allow this in my campaigns though, because real-world bucklers don't work the way RAW says they work.

I'm actually part of a foam fighters organization, and one off the dudes out there who's primarily a spear man (though he tends to use it in conjunction with a dagger or short sword.) as a shield about the size, maybe a touch bigger then, a traditional buckler that he keep's strapped to the upper arm of his primary weapon arm. When standing presenting his side it makes it almost impossible between that, the rest of the armor and the spear and short sword/dagger to get a clean shot at him with out taking one or more yourself.

Having said that, with a very minor adjustment to it's angle and a bit of time for him to play with meleeing that way with secondary weapons, I have the utmost confidence he could do archery with the thing on. And thus I must beg to differ with a ruling that says you can't do this. (Particularly since, at the end of the day, after level five realism is a joke and you absolutely have to have every nice thing impregnable for what ever your doing if your not a full caster anyway.)

[Jothki]

I take it that it's been long since errata'd that the "without penalty" only applies to the penalty from wielding the buckler itself, not to any other penalties such as non-proficiency with the weapon or circumstantial penalties?

[Invader]

In other threads there was likewise split opinions on whether "without penalty" means that you don't get the -1 ONLY or if you don't get the -1 AND don't lose AC when attacking. This article clarifies that you do lose the AC bonus when firing the bow: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20050210a (but you don't take the -1). The author is Skip Williams, one of the authors of the Player's Handbook.

I believe there is a feat called improved buckler defense to get around this.

Well I think this sums it up pretty well. I would have argued all day that you maintain the AC bonus while using a bow but I stand corrected.

[gooddragon1]

In other threads there was likewise split opinions on whether "without penalty" means that you don't get the -1 ONLY or if you don't get the -1 AND don't lose AC when attacking. This article clarifies that you do lose the AC bonus when firing the bow: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20050210a (but you don't take the -1). The author is Skip Williams, one of the authors of the Player's Handbook.

I believe there is a feat called improved buckler defense to get around this.

Unless he published it as official errata it's not a rules change, it's his opinion. He may be one of the authors of the book, but the only way you change one of the rules of the books is by errata.

EDIT: Also, I'd like to know whether or not he was the one who wrote that section because without clarification on that it's even more so his opinion.

(Note that there are 2 other authors besides him)

[ericgrau]

It's not an attempt at a rule change it's an interpretation of an existing rule that has been interpreted both ways.

[gooddragon1]

It's not an attempt at a rule change it's an interpretation of an existing rule that has been interpreted both ways.

By one of the authors who may or may not have written it. The interpretation both ways is only because the authors wrote it poorly but as I have shown with a firm command of the English language it is quite clear what the actual meaning is.

Thus, he would need errata to change the meaning as the meaning has been set clear.

EDIT: Namfuak... they are 2h weapons. It doesn't matter. For the purpose of the buckler they are not treated as 2h weapons or anything that would cause them to lose AC. Read it carefully and it will become clear.

EDIT2: In fact, I'd postulate that he wasn't certain enough about it either and had to make a judgement call while writing the article. Otherwise he'd have put at the bottom that he was the one who dealt with that particular section of the PHB and that this statement clarified his intent.

[Ashtagon]

I'm actually part of a foam fighters organization, and one off the dudes out there who's primarily a spear man (though he tends to use it in conjunction with a dagger or short sword.) as a shield about the size, maybe a touch bigger then, a traditional buckler that he keep's strapped to the upper arm of his primary weapon arm. When standing presenting his side it makes it almost impossible between that, the rest of the armor and the spear and short sword/dagger to get a clean shot at him with out taking one or more yourself.

Having said that, with a very minor adjustment to it's angle and a bit of time for him to play with meleeing that way with secondary weapons, I have the utmost confidence he could do archery with the thing on. And thus I must beg to differ with a ruling that says you can't do this.

I personally regard LARP and padded weapon fighting in general (which is what I think you are referring to) to have as much to do with real combat as, say, modern tournament fencing or kendo.

As a basic example, the draw weight of a LARPing bow is generally limited to no more than 25 lb, generally fight at short range, and they must use arrows with peculiar heads (link (http://www.thevikingstore.co.uk/larp-flat-headed-arrow-354-p.asp)). Historical combat archery used bows with typically 70 lb and upwards draw weights and ranges of 220 yards. Longbows and jelly bows feel very different when drawn.


(Particularly since, at the end of the day, after level five realism is a joke and you absolutely have to have every nice thing impregnable for what ever your doing if your not a full caster anyway.)

This is an entirely separate issue.

[gooddragon1]

This is an entirely separate issue.

Jade Archer (http://www.dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Jade_Archer_%28Revised_for_Ayron%29_%283.5e_Class% 29)

[Ashtagon]

Jade Archer (http://www.dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Jade_Archer_%28Revised_for_Ayron%29_%283.5e_Class% 29)

I see your jade archer and raise you one lightning warrior.

[gooddragon1]

I see your jade archer and raise you one lightning warrior.

:/ I meant mine as a decently balanced archer that at least has a chance at higher levels against magic users. Not something that is completely worthless in combat because it lacks a familiar and can't even specialize it's spellcasting. Take your garbage tier classes elsewhere please.

EDIT:
Hmph
http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ls41xiAwQk1qjmndso1_500.jpg

[Lonely Tylenol]

:/ I meant mine as a decently balanced archer that at least has a chance at higher levels against magic users. Not something that is completely worthless in combat because it lacks a familiar and can't even specialize it's spellcasting. Take your garbage tier classes elsewhere please.

EDIT:
Hmph
http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ls41xiAwQk1qjmndso1_500.jpg

I'll have you know that a familiar is great for role playing opportunities! Don't stifle my role play with your fussy numbers and munchkinry!

[gooddragon1]

I'll have you know that a familiar is great for role playing opportunities! Don't stifle my role play with your fussy numbers and munchkinry!

I know, can you imagine a class that voluntarily gives up the opportunity to have one? Madness I say. Perhaps even blasphemy. Probably not a country near Greece though...

[Eldonauran]

After a bit more research into the issue, I must say that I have to change my stance on the subject.

Determination: No AC to buckler when using a ranged weapon that requires two hands.

Why:

You need at least two hands to use a bow,...

... In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you don’t get the buckler’s AC bonus for the rest of the round.

From what I can understand, you only use your 'off-hand' to draw and fire the weapon. You are not actually 'wielding' the bow in the off-hand. However, you are still 'using' the off-hand to fire the bow.

Since "In any case" is specified in the buckler description, this supercedes any previous exceptions and explicitly states that the use of a weapon with the off-hand (ie, arm with buckler equipped) does not allow buckler AC to be used.


I can still see why allowing the AC bonus would be fine, since the archer isn't really use his offhand that much with the draw and fire and could still block effectively.

[gooddragon1]

After a bit more research into the issue, I must say that I have to change my stance on the subject.

Determination: No AC to buckler when using a ranged weapon that requires two hands.

Why:



From what I can understand, you only use your 'off-hand' to draw and fire the weapon. You are not actually 'wielding' the bow in the off-hand. However, you are still 'using' the off-hand to fire the bow.

Since "In any case" is specified in the buckler description, this supercedes any previous exceptions and explicitly states that the use of a weapon with the off-hand (ie, arm with buckler equipped) does not allow buckler AC to be used.


I can still see why allowing the AC bonus would be fine, since the archer isn't really use his offhand that much with the draw and fire and could still block effectively.


You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon

Does not count as using.

EDIT:


In any case, IF you use a weapon in your off hand

In any case is modified by the words following it to apply only to use scenarios. Use scenarios are specifically exempted by the word "also".

[Metahuman1]

I personally regard LARP and padded weapon fighting in general (which is what I think you are referring to) to have as much to do with real combat as, say, modern tournament fencing or kendo.

As a basic example, the draw weight of a LARPing bow is generally limited to no more than 25 lb, generally fight at short range, and they must use arrows with peculiar heads (link (http://www.thevikingstore.co.uk/larp-flat-headed-arrow-354-p.asp)). Historical combat archery used bows with typically 70 lb and upwards draw weights and ranges of 220 yards. Longbows and jelly bows feel very different when drawn.



This is an entirely separate issue.

I personally regard D&D combat to have as much to do with what you could or could not do on a historical battle feild with any success or failure as LARP.

Further, my group does not role play. We try for period accuracy within the specific sub groups choose culture for the most part, and we do not have mages and elves and what not running around at our events, so it runs a lot like a full contact team sport with just enough foam involved that you typically won't go to the ER after every hit you take. Having said that, your sure gonna feel it if you get smacked by someone, armor or no. Think almost like if Kendo or Fencing had entire teams taking the field, teams not always of the same numbers or gear, and going at one another.

Not quite as realistic as if we got out there with sharpened carbon steel weapons, but close enough. And D&D RAW being very unrealistic and favoring the casters in the extream especially after lvl 5 is a hugh part of the issue.



Edit for the above post:

Your also assuming that the archer holds the bow with the hand he'd favor his long sword in and has the shield strapped to the other one that draws the string, instead of strapping the shield to the arm holding the bow grip and using the other arm to draw the string. Doing this, he can block an incoming attack just by moving his arm. Not a perfect defense but it's not even a perfect defense when he's holding it in one hand and using a weapon in the other so there's nothing wrong with that.