Post/Author/DateTime	Post
tos_shai_hulud 04-21-08, 10:33 AM	Are any of the following classes proficient with Tower Shields? Arcane Archer, Blackguard, Dwarven Defender For all of the base classes, if they are proficient with shields, it says in parentheses whether or not they are also proficient with tower shields. Here it is omitted if they are or are not. Since a tower shield is a shield, I can see the argument that they are, as my player would have be believe, but since it does not explicitly state that they have proficiency with tower shield, I can also see the argument by one of my other players that they do not. I am thinking of giving it to my player, as tower shields seem to have more use at lower levels than higher ones, but I was wondering if anyone had some advice on this.
wrecan 04-21-08, 10:55 AM	Tower shields are listed as shields in equipment, and described as shields in the text. Accordingly, it is my interpretation that tower shields are shields and are considered such with respect to class proficiency, unless specifically exempted. Neither the FAQ nor errata seem to have anything relevant on this subject. Note that even proficient, one cannot use the tower shield to shield bash.
Kouk 04-21-08, 12:09 PM	I would consider it more likely that the omission means that the shield proficiency works just like the majority of base classes: they don't get Tower Shields unless it says so. If you are considering levels, then why shouldn't base classes gain proficiency with Tower Shields at level 6 for free? Instead, it is still a separate feat. Note how there are two feats which grant proficiencies: Shield Proficiency is one feat, which grants access to all the "normal" shields -- there is no Light, Medium or Heavy Shield Proficiency as there is for Armor. Then there is Tower Shield Proficiency which has the prerequisite of being proficient with "normal" shields. By RAW, even if your original class(es) gave access to say, just Light and Heavy shields (not bucklers) you still would need to take Shield Proficiency before you could learn to take Tower Shield Proficiency, as it is a prerequisite for you to use all 3 kinds. Tower Shield Proficiency also states it specifically is a free Fighter bonus feat, while Shield Proficiency states it is already given to Paladins, Clerics, Barbarians etc. By saying that the class gains access to using "shields" I read that as that class gets the equivalent of the Shield Proficiency feat. The Arcane Archer states it gains "light and medium armor" and "shields." The Blackguard and Dwarven Defender state they gain "all types of armor" but not "all types of shields." If you interpret further, it doesn't really make much sense from the standpoint of class and feat requirements or flavor. The Arcane Archer: is an archer who can cast spells. The simplest (Core) way into it is with 6 levels of Fighter or Ranger and 1 of Sorcerer or Wizard. If you use either the Fighter or Ranger then it wouldn't really make sense to grant you armor proficiency and shield proficiency, so that is kind of minor. However you can get access to the class by other means, if you wait longer. A Rogue 8 / Wizard 1 can qualify for the class as well. That character would gain proficiencies from the Arcane Archer class. As would a 12 Wizard. It also wouldn't make sense for an archer prestige class to gain free proficiency with Tower Shields, as using a Tower Shield would completely invalidate his ability to use Bows or Crossbows which require two free hands for their general operation. Heavy Shield proficiency doesn't totally make sense either, but it is probably something that you would have already, and is still almost a non-issue because an Arcane Archer wouldn't usually use one. Blackguard: Basically, an Evil Paladin. If Paladins don't automatically learn Tower Shield proficiency, then why should being Evil grant you enhanced ability to defend yourself and others? Dwarven Defender: Being the only real "defense-based" Prestige Class being discussed, this is the only one it might make sense to give Tower Shield proficiency to for free. However, if you are coming to this as an already fairly defensive Paladin or Fighter (most common) then you may already have taken Tower Shield Proficiency as early as level 1 (or gotten it for free as a Fighter). The Prestige Class would then grant you nothing all-around in that instance, when a Tower Shield might have been something you needed to survive being lower level in the first place. If a Paladin took Tower Shield Proficiency and then becomes a Dwarven Defender to further enhance his defense, then he has just wasted that first feat basically. Or, maybe the Paladin multiclassed into Fighter to get it for free. Given that, I think it is better to not grant Tower Shields for free to Dwarven Defenders if it is not explicitly called out, as it would further diminish the (questionable) value of the Fighter class, and be inconsistent. Also note, that in 3.0 (IIRC) there was not a separate feat for Tower Shield Proficiency, there was just "Shield Proficiency." A large amount of the 3.5 PHB and DMG are copy-and-paste jobs from the 3.0 versions, so it is incredibly likely it was simply an omission to update the PrCs descriptions the same way as they updated the feats and base classes. Of course, you could decide it was an omission made with the intention of granting Tower Shield proficiency to those classes, but that seems inconsistent with the rest of the game (in which 3.5 makes a distinction between classes that have "shield proficiency" and classes which gain "tower shield proficiency" for free).
tos_shai_hulud 04-21-08, 12:40 PM	Thank you, Kouk. Looking over your assessment, I am inclined to agree with you.
Zuggster 04-21-08, 01:21 PM	I would consider it more likely that the omission means that the shield proficiency works just like the majority of base classes: they don't get Tower Shields unless it says so. Note how there are two feats which grant proficiencies: Shield Proficiency is one feat, which grants access to all the "normal" shields -- there is no Light, Medium or Heavy Shield Proficiency as there is for Armor. For the record, The Fighter class states that they do get Tower Shields, and the Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Paladin and Ranger all state they get Shields (except Tower Shield). Which make of the 7 classes that get shields, 1 states they get Tower Shields, 6 state specificially that they do not get Tower Shields. The Majority actually state that they don't get the Tower Shield Proficiency. The PH2 Base Classes all state Shields (Except Tower Shields). This would further seem to require the exception to the Shields is needed to prevent Tower Shields from being included. Which in the 2 main Base Class Books, it is now 9 classes that state Specifically they do not get Tower Shields. In the Complete Warrior, the prestige classes that gain Shields do not state whether they do or not gain Tower Shields. The base classes there do not gain Shields at all. HOWEVER, the Knight Protector, Purple Dragon Knight and the Thayan Knight specifically states that they do gain the Tower Shield Proficiency, which they seem to be able to get even thought the character may not be able to use Shields normally (no requirement needed in the class description or addition of Shields to the Armor listing). This does puzzle me, since most times a Feat can be gained without requirements stated, it usually is stated as such. However, you state there is no Light, Medium, Heavy Armor proficiency base for Shields. I would argue that there is, meaning Light/Heavy Shields in one category and Tower Shields as a second category. The term Shields, like Armor includes all the Categories (which is why Tower Shields are the exceptions to the rules).
StevenO 04-21-08, 02:04 PM	The Arcane Archer would could want an Animated Tower Shield which is a reason they'd want to use one without additional penalty. I always though the Dwarven Defender DID get proficiency with the Tower Shield but now that I look I see that it doesn't. I do believe that by RAW Tower Shields are seperate from "Shields" and just because you can use a shield doesn't mean you can use a Tower Shield. That mean you only get the TS if a class specifically says so. Personally, I'd allow anyone proficient with Shields to use a Tower Shield in its most basic form: the +4 AC for -2 Attack. In that form it is effectively a variation on Fighting Defensively that requires a big hunk of wood to protect the character. To gain the Cover benefit from a TS I'd require the TS proficiency. My opinion is that the TS proficiency is a little lacking and would fold most of its use into the basic Shield Proficiency but allow a character with TS some additional options that may already be available as separate feats. I'd seriously consider adding some phalanx type fighting skills to the TS proficiency like being able to attack with a light piercing weapon while under cover.
Kouk 04-22-08, 12:47 AM	However, you state there is no Light, Medium, Heavy Armor proficiency base for Shields. I would argue that there is, meaning Light/Heavy Shields in one category and Tower Shields as a second category. The term Shields, like Armor includes all the Categories (which is why Tower Shields are the exceptions to the rules). I was saying that there is no Shield Proficiency (Buckler), Shield Proficiency (Light Shields), and Shield Proficiency (Heavy Shields) individually, as there is for Armor. If a class says you know how to use "shields," in general, it includes those 3 categories only unless the class states it includes Tower Shields. EDIT: And also, almost all Classes from the Complete series are almost entirely just copy-and-paste jobs from the earlier 3.0 class books, which means they would also fall under the category of having 3.0 wording ported over inadvertently. Since they did not add Tower Shield proficiency to most of those, as they clearly did for the Fighter in 3.5 core, then I think it is safe to assume they don't get proficiency unless stated otherwise just as I was saying before about the DMG classes.
Kouk 04-22-08, 12:49 AM	Personally, I'd allow anyone proficient with Shields to use a Tower Shield in its most basic form: the +4 AC for -2 Attack. In that form it is effectively a variation on Fighting Defensively that requires a big hunk of wood to protect the character. To gain the Cover benefit from a TS I'd require the TS proficiency. My opinion is that the TS proficiency is a little lacking and would fold most of its use into the basic Shield Proficiency but allow a character with TS some additional options that may already be available as separate feats. I'd seriously consider adding some phalanx type fighting skills to the TS proficiency like being able to attack with a light piercing weapon while under cover. I actually consider the "most basic form" of using a Tower Shield to be the Cover option. You can use it untrained to set up the "wall," but you are not very good at using it as an extra-large shield in normal combat without the special training.
Zuggster 04-22-08, 09:43 AM	EDIT: And also, almost all Classes from the Complete series are almost entirely just copy-and-paste jobs from the earlier 3.0 class books, which means they would also fall under the category of having 3.0 wording ported over inadvertently. Since they did not add Tower Shield proficiency to most of those, as they clearly did for the Fighter in 3.5 core, then I think it is safe to assume they don't get proficiency unless stated otherwise just as I was saying before about the DMG classes. DO you have any reason why the other 9 Base Classes that get Shields Specifically Excluded Tower Shields then? (From PH, PH2, CW) 10 Classes get Shields from those 3 sources, 1 states Specifically that they get Tower Shields and 9 state SPECIFICALLY that they exclude Tower Shields. If it were a matter of only the Fighter class saying it gets the Tower Shield Proficiency, I would agree with you, but the other 9 classes go out of their way to say they don't get this Feat. And has WotC admitted that the Cut and Paste job was done poorly, or is that your (as well as others) opinions?
Kouk 04-22-08, 10:32 AM	DO you have any reason why the other 9 Base Classes that get Shields Specifically Excluded Tower Shields then? (From PH, PH2, CW) 10 Classes get Shields from those 3 sources, 1 states Specifically that they get Tower Shields and 9 state SPECIFICALLY that they exclude Tower Shields. If it were a matter of only the Fighter class saying it gets the Tower Shield Proficiency, I would agree with you, but the other 9 classes go out of their way to say they don't get this Feat. And has WotC admitted that the Cut and Paste job was done poorly, or is that your (as well as others) opinions? I'm not sure I understand your position; are you saying that because most prestige classes do not specifically say they do not get Tower Shield Proficiency for free, then they do? What would make that more valid than the assumption that they don't get Tower Shield Proficiency because it doesn't say they do? Yes, the game goes out of its way to mention when the base classes do or do not get tower shields. My position is that only the Fighter base class gets Tower Shield Proficiency as a free feat, and no other class in the entire 3.5 game does unless it similarly states that it does gain it explicitly. Tower Shields are now a separate feat to use. One class in the PHB states they get it for free, and no others do. The major changes from 3.0 to 3.5 came in the form of several base classes, feats, and spells. Prestige Classes in general changed very little, so were much more ripe for copy-and-paste. And why would the company admit it was a bad job? They sort of have admitted it really, in the form of the sorts of things that needed to be Erratad in the first run of the 3.5 books and several splatbooks.
Zuggster 04-22-08, 11:03 AM	I'm not sure I understand your position; are you saying that because most prestige classes do not specifically say they do not get Tower Shield Proficiency for free, then they do? What would make that more valid than the assumption that they don't get Tower Shield Proficiency because it doesn't say they do? Yes, the game goes out of its way to mention when the base classes do or do not get tower shields. My position is that only the Fighter base class gets Tower Shield Proficiency as a free feat, and no other class in the entire 3.5 game does unless it similarly states that it does gain it explicitly. Tower Shields are now a separate feat to use. One class in the PHB states they get it for free, and no others do. The major changes from 3.0 to 3.5 came in the form of several base classes, feats, and spells. Prestige Classes in general changed very little, so were much more ripe for copy-and-paste. And why would the company admit it was a bad job? They sort of have admitted it really, in the form of the sorts of things that needed to be Erratad in the first run of the 3.5 books and several splatbooks. What I am saying, is go into the Players Handbook. The Barbarian Class States that they can use Shields (except Tower Shields). The Bard Class States that they can use Shields (except Tower Shields). The Cleric Class States that they can use Shields (except Tower Shields). The Druid Class States that they can use Shields (except Tower Shields). The Paladin Class States that they can use Shields (except Tower Shields). The Ranger Class States that they can use Shields (except Tower Shields). In the Players Handbook II The Dragon Shaman Class States that they can use Shields (except Tower Shields). The Dusk Blade Class States that they can use Shields (except Tower Shields). The Knight Class States that they can use Shields (except Tower Shields). Why is it all those classes specifically state that they don't get Tower Shields if Shields wasn't ment to include Tower Shields in the basic description. They all go out of their way to say that these classes don't get a Feat. Why? If Shields ment just Buckler, Light and Heavy, and did not include Tower, why do they go out of their way to exclude Tower shields on 9 classes. A simple line about Shields not including Tower Shields Offhand, Light Armor is a prereq for Medium armor which is a prereq for Heavy Armor. Shields (Buckler, Light and Heavy) is a prereq for Tower. I see the same progression. The difference is that people wouldn't spend 3 feats to get heavy Shields, Dual wielding would just be easier.
tos_shai_hulud 04-22-08, 11:41 AM	I think what Kouk is trying to say is that their intention seems to be to limit the classes that receive proficiency with Tower Shield to only fighter. In fact, the wording in that block has been erratic since 3.0. Look at the Epic Level Handbook. Agent Retriever An agent retriever gains no proficiency with any weapons, armor, or shields. Epic Infiltrator An epic infiltrator is proficient with all simple and martial weapons, all armor, and shields. Guardian Paramount A guardian paramount is proficient with all simple and martial weapons, all armor, and shields. High Proselytizer High proselytizers are proficient with all simple weapons, all armor, and all shields. Legendary Dreadnought A legendary dreadnought is proficient with all simple and martial weapons, all armor, and all shields. Union Sentinel Union Sentinels are proficient with all simple and martial weapons, all armor, and all shields. Here, three epic prestige classes only list shields while three list all shields. This was not to indicate that shields is incomplete since in 3.0, tower shields were included in shield proficiency. So, why the difference in text? Because they didn't bother to keep it consistent. From what I can tell, any reasons attributed to why it is the way it is can only be complete speculation. Kouk's reasoning makes more sense to me, so that is what I am going with. If you disagree, go with your own speculation. There certainly seems to be a trend to prohibit classes from receiving Tower Shield Proficiency. Since their text is not standard, when you see non-standard text, it seems the appropriate thing to do would be to assume standard text. The standard text would be "(except Tower Shields)".
Zuggster 04-22-08, 12:05 PM	Here, three epic prestige classes only list shields while three list all shields. If the difference is made here, and "All Shields" include Tower and "Shields" do not, then we no longer have an arguement. I can live with that. The point Kouk and I were argueing was that he stated "I would consider it more likely that the omission means that the shield proficiency works just like the majority of base classes: they don't get Tower Shields unless it says so." when my point was, in 10 base classes that get shields, 9 state they do not get Tower Shields specifically (meaning they get it unless it says no). Going on that line, if it doesn't state that it does, it is included. Which is slightly more feasable than basing it off of 1 positive result. (9 negatives listed vs 1 positive result). Had the Fighter been the only mention of Tower Shields, this discussion would not have happened. But the 9 negative mentions of Tower Shields made the discussion. I don't think its a point to be ignored. But having said that, if the Epic has both mention of "Shields" and "All Shields", that is a point I cannot (and will not argue) if Tower Shields are part of "All Shields".
tos_shai_hulud 04-22-08, 01:10 PM	Umm, that actually wasn't my point at all. What I was saying was that the Epic Level Handbook was a 3.0 book. In 3.0, Shield Proficiency ALWAYS included tower shields. I am pointing out that the inconsistency is COMPLETELY arbitrary. Any speculation made to the reason is nothing more than simple speculation. Because the materials are arranged in such a haphazard fashion, there is no "right" answer. Both arguments are as correct as the reader interprets them to be.