The Shield Master (3.5 Base Class, PEACH)

[NeoSeraphi]

This logic would keep me from allowing Wizards, Clerics, liches, the Tarrasque, and PC deaths in my games, just to name a few off the top of my head.

Seriously, if your Fighter doesn't have a backup blade in case of emergency breakage and the Cleric has no backup holy symbol in case of daring Rogues with high ranks in Slight of Hand, that's the player's own fault, and by extension the GM's fault for not poking him about it (or at least for making a hidden check to see if his character thought he might need one (a simple Int check)). Besides, if the battle is so heated his weapon is Sundered and he has no backup, PC death is fairly unavoidable unless you took Improved Unarmed Strike.


The only time Sunder is unforgivable is if you didn't let your players know it was a possibility before hand. If you told them it could happen and they didn't prepare, their character's death and/or damsel-in-distress state is their own fault. All my players know that their weapons can be sundered (and no, I won't stop making sunder attempts just because I broke the first weapon or you have no Mending prepared for the day); combat is there to kill either the PCs or the NPC monsters, and dirty tactics like weapon breaking is perfectly acceptable on both sides.

Okay, fair enough. So if you tell your players that you are not going to prevent yourself from Sundering, that's good. They can prepare. I was talking about simply Sundering a weapon because it was a good opportunity, or to mix it up for a player or challenge him.

Of course, this is also coming from someone who generally only throws a set of baddies at the PCs once every day or two at most (my campaigns are very heavy on the RP side of things, usually at the player's request), so a broken sword is far less of a problem than it would be if you had 3 fights a day.

Right, and in my games, we have 6 or 7 encounters per day, so Sunder is a huge deal.

[NeoSeraphi]

Edited Perfect Defense to give Yitzi's suggestion.

[Dr.Orpheus]

Now what if you gained the ability to shield your allies giving an adjasent ally your shield bonus. This is more of a suporting ability and the shield master does not have many suporting abilitys, this might improve at later levels so that the shield master can give this bonus to all adjasent allies, or retain it so he does not become a target.

[NeoSeraphi]

Now what if you gained the ability to shield your allies giving an adjasent ally your shield bonus. This is more of a suporting ability and the shield master does not have many suporting abilitys, this might improve at later levels so that the shield master can give this bonus to all adjasent allies, or retain it so he does not become a target.

I didn't want the shield master to have any supporting abilities. He's not a bard or a knight or a paladin. He's a fighter with class features who has his feat chain picked out for him.

[Dr.Orpheus]

I didn't want the shield master to have any supporting abilities. He's not a bard or a knight or a paladin. He's a fighter with class features who has his feat chain picked out for him.

I was expecting this and so maybe it should be a varient class feature, or perhaps some feats the shield master can take on the side, but this class would be limiting if it did not allow a player to be suporting if they wanted to.

[NeoSeraphi]

I was expecting this and so maybe it should be a varient class feature, or perhaps some feats the shield master can take on the side, but this class would be limiting if it did not allow a player to be suporting if they wanted to.

I'm alright with limiting options. If a players wants to play a support role, he could play a crusader. Whatever I wrote here wouldn't be nearly as good at a shield-defender as a crusader anyway, so there's little point.

[Yitzi]

Right. And that was my original argument for not including an immunity to Sunder. Either your DM doesn't use Sunder, or if he does, you should change your playstyle to be prepared for it, instead of relying on your class to protect you.

There shouldn't be immunity to Sunder. But if you allow him to arrange his shield to grant DR (probably with more than the usual move action so he can't replace it mid-battle), then sundering becomes a counter and the DR can be higher than it otherwise would be.

[Dr.Orpheus]

I'm alright with limiting options. If a players wants to play a support role, he could play a crusader. Whatever I wrote here wouldn't be nearly as good at a shield-defender as a crusader anyway, so there's little point.

That sounds fine, because when you look at the big picture you could always make a crusader and call it a shield master for role-playing sake.

[Noctis Vigil]

For those who really want a more defensive option, just make the Shield Master's first feat be Active Shield Defense (they qualify for it right off the bat). It's a pretty good feat, lets you make AoOs while using the full defense option. There are a half dozen other feats out there to give boosts to shield use that this class doesn't get (as they don't increase offense any); if you really want a defensive one, it wouldn't be that hard to make one.

[Tiniere]

This class is amazing, in addition to the Captain America and KH Goofy references it rather makes me think of the Spartan warrior's shield, a bronze barrier more lethal than many of the edged weapons at the time. Also I thought of the Scottish Targe & Dirk, a combination of s short thrusting dagger and a small shield which often had a large spike on it as well.

A small nitpick is with Tower Defense. Since you have total cover, an enemy does not have a line of effect to you, and therefore cannot target you, (Certain spells still work though). But the ability does seem a little redundant. It's different from total concealment (the 50% miss you mentioned earlier). Though the only bit of advice I can think of is to have the displacement apply whenever using total defense with a tower shield?

On the whole though, this is fantastic, I think I'll try it out next time I get the chance to play a dwarven brawler sort of character, when I do I'll post more feedback!

[NeoSeraphi]

This class is amazing, in addition to the Captain America and KH Goofy references it rather makes me think of the Spartan warrior's shield, a bronze barrier more lethal than many of the edged weapons at the time. Also I thought of the Scottish Targe & Dirk, a combination of s short thrusting dagger and a small shield which often had a large spike on it as well.

A small nitpick is with Tower Defense. Since you have total cover, an enemy does not have a line of effect to you, and therefore cannot target you, (Certain spells still work though). But the ability does seem a little redundant. It's different from total concealment (the 50% miss you mentioned earlier). Though the only bit of advice I can think of is to have the displacement apply whenever using total defense with a tower shield?

On the whole though, this is fantastic, I think I'll try it out next time I get the chance to play a dwarven brawler sort of character, when I do I'll post more feedback!

Okay, I made Tower Defense work when you use the Combat Expertise feat or when you take the total defense action