Non profecient shield use [Archive] - Wizards Community

Non profecient shield use [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Arameas
05-15-07, 03:51 PM Ok Shield profeciency means that you can use shields without taking thier armour check penalty on your attack rolls. Without it you do.

Now a buckler or a light sheild has an armour check penalty of -1, and if you then MWK it the penalty is set to 0.

So if you are non profecient you are taking a -(0) to all attack rolls. So dose this mean that you can use them with no penalties even without the feat?
Daisuke
05-15-07, 03:57 PM You've hit the nail square on the head. While your character will technically not be proficient, when using a Masterwork Buckler or Light Shield, or any shield that has no armor check penalty for that matter, your character will not incur the nonproficiency penalties associated with using a shield he/she is not proficient in.
Nat_20
05-15-07, 04:03 PM So a Swashbuckler can use one without penalty?
Inigo Carmine
05-15-07, 04:20 PM So a Swashbuckler can use one without penalty?

I don't recall the details of the swashbuckler class, but some classes are penalized when using certain pieces of equipment regardless of proficiency.

Monks lose their monk AC and speed bonuses (and I think flurry of blows, could be wrong) when using any kind of armor or shield. Druids lose pretty much all of their powers if they use a metallic shield or armor, etc.

I thought the swashbuckler had a similar stipulation about losing many of their abilities if they use a shield, but it's been a while since I looked at the class.
glacialcat
05-15-07, 04:25 PM I'm pretty sure swashbuckler's restrictions on armor only apply to medium and heavy armor, and medium and light loads. They aren't proficient with shields, but none of their abilities are lost with shields, so a masterwork buckler would be fine.
BugHunter
05-15-07, 10:02 PM I'm pretty sure swashbuckler's restrictions on armor only apply to medium and heavy armor, and medium and light loads. They aren't proficient with shields, but none of their abilities are lost with shields, so a masterwork buckler would be fine.

You are correct in your thinking but it is a heavy load not a light (minor slip up), swashbuckler's class features are restricted by armor type and load.
Kouk
05-15-07, 11:11 PM Mithral Bucklers are great for Wizards, Sorcerers and Rogues(though they don't need Mithral per se, it is lighter which is always good). Mithral is auto masterwork so 0 AC penalty, and the failure chance is 5 - 10% = -5% (which just becomes 0%).
runestar
05-16-07, 12:07 AM You still take the -1 to hit when attacking with a 2-handed weapon, even with a mithral or masterwork buckler, since this penalty is independent of its ACP.

But otherwise you are correct.:)
Kouk
05-16-07, 01:21 AM You still take the -1 to hit when attacking with a 2-handed weapon, even with a mithral or masterwork buckler, since this penalty is independent of its ACP.

But otherwise you are correct.:)

Yeah, but when does that ever come up for those classes?:D And only with 2 handed melee weapons, bows don't count.
Leress
05-16-07, 02:43 AM Yeah, but when does that ever come up for those classes?:D And only with 2 handed melee weapons, bows don't count.

It comes up for rogues that Two weapon fight.
Kouk
05-16-07, 11:11 AM It comes up for rogues that Two weapon fight.

Touche!
Tectorman
05-16-07, 12:07 PM Monks lose their monk AC and speed bonuses (and I think flurry of blows, could be wrong) when using any kind of armor or shield.

Nope, the only (barring alternate class abilities and variant features) Monk class feature that gets interfered with by a shield is their Monk AC bonus. (If the weight of their shield puts them over their light load penalties, then, yeah, they lose those abilities, too, but I'm not counting that here)

Furthermore, since you can upgrade a shield's damage via bashing, magically enchance it both as a defending weapon and as a shield, take Shield Specialization and Shield Ward (both in the PHB II, I think), using a shield is actually a good idea for a Monk.
Bukowski
05-16-07, 12:15 PM per the SRD
When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses her AC bonus, as well as her fast movement and flurry of blows abilities.

Monks lose more than just the monk bonus to AC by using a shield.
Tectorman
05-16-07, 01:48 PM From the SRD

Under Monk Weapon and Armor Proficiency:
When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses her AC bonus, as well as her fast movement and flurry of blows abilities.

Under Monk AC Bonus:
These bonuses to AC apply even against touch attacks or when the monk is flat-footed. She loses these bonuses when she is immobilized or helpless, when she wears any armor, when she carries a shield, or when she carries a medium or heavy load.

Under Flurry of Blows:
When unarmored, a monk may strike with a flurry of blows at the expense of accuracy.

Under Fast Movement:
At 3rd level, a monk gains an enhancement bonus to her speed, as shown on Table: The Monk. A monk in armor or carrying a medium or heavy load loses this extra speed.

The top one mentions all three class features as being limited by armor, weight encumbrance, and carrying a shield. The Monk AC bonus says the same thing. The Flurry of Blows description (the important part which I've posted above {the only part of the description with any bearing on the matter, so no, I did not just ignore part of the text}) only says he must be unarmored. The Fast Movement says the Monk must be unarmored and unencumbered.

All right, so why the discrepancies? One view is this: they wanted to limit all three class features the same way, so they wrote it out in full once to save on ink :rolleyes:. They did it again with the Monk AC Bonus because it was next in line, but they didn't feel it necessary to do so in the Flurry description because it had already been said a couple of times before.

But wait. They went back to listing more limitations in the Fast Movement text. They didn't need to, so why?

My take on that is this: they took the collective limitations for these three class abilities and wrote them all out in the initial description, whether they all applied or not. Later in each individual description, they clarified. Thus, Flurry of Blows says not one word about the person not wearing a shield (or only carrying a light load, for that matter). The same for the Fast Movement.

I realize it's all in how you interpret intent, but until I see a link to a 3.5 FAQ or an official errata or a CustServ call, I am not proven wrong.
Kouk
05-16-07, 10:29 PM I realize it's all in how you interpret intent, but until I see a link to a 3.5 FAQ or an official errata or a CustServ call, I am not proven wrong.

It certainly is some kind of interpretation alright. You could make your own ticket to CustServ ya know ;)

I interpret the first part with "as well as" meaning all of those things.

As for the omissions later on, it doesn't say that those are the only possible circumstances that limit the ability, which means there could be others, like when they use a shield as was said in the first paragraph.
Tectorman
05-17-07, 12:33 PM It certainly is some kind of interpretation alright. You could make your own ticket to CustServ ya know ;)

I interpret the first part with "as well as" meaning all of those things.

As for the omissions later on, it doesn't say that those are the only possible circumstances that limit the ability, which means there could be others, like when they use a shield as was said in the first paragraph.

Nah, a.) I'm too lazy, and 2.) I'm a big fan of RAYW (Rule As You Want). Ask for advice from the boards, get input, but unless they're also in your campaign group, ignore them should you so desire.

People forget this wonderful little fact and we get monstrosities like the "Tome of Battle: Too Anime?" boards (seriously, wear a helmet if you go over there).

As for the actual topic on this board, we could argue "well, it says this here" and "but it says this here" all day and get nowhere. I have a difference of opinion. That is all.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Arameas 05-15-07, 03:51 PM	Ok Shield profeciency means that you can use shields without taking thier armour check penalty on your attack rolls. Without it you do. Now a buckler or a light sheild has an armour check penalty of -1, and if you then MWK it the penalty is set to 0. So if you are non profecient you are taking a -(0) to all attack rolls. So dose this mean that you can use them with no penalties even without the feat?
Daisuke 05-15-07, 03:57 PM	You've hit the nail square on the head. While your character will technically not be proficient, when using a Masterwork Buckler or Light Shield, or any shield that has no armor check penalty for that matter, your character will not incur the nonproficiency penalties associated with using a shield he/she is not proficient in.
Nat_20 05-15-07, 04:03 PM	So a Swashbuckler can use one without penalty?
Inigo Carmine 05-15-07, 04:20 PM	So a Swashbuckler can use one without penalty? I don't recall the details of the swashbuckler class, but some classes are penalized when using certain pieces of equipment regardless of proficiency. Monks lose their monk AC and speed bonuses (and I think flurry of blows, could be wrong) when using any kind of armor or shield. Druids lose pretty much all of their powers if they use a metallic shield or armor, etc. I thought the swashbuckler had a similar stipulation about losing many of their abilities if they use a shield, but it's been a while since I looked at the class.
glacialcat 05-15-07, 04:25 PM	I'm pretty sure swashbuckler's restrictions on armor only apply to medium and heavy armor, and medium and light loads. They aren't proficient with shields, but none of their abilities are lost with shields, so a masterwork buckler would be fine.
BugHunter 05-15-07, 10:02 PM	I'm pretty sure swashbuckler's restrictions on armor only apply to medium and heavy armor, and medium and light loads. They aren't proficient with shields, but none of their abilities are lost with shields, so a masterwork buckler would be fine. You are correct in your thinking but it is a heavy load not a light (minor slip up), swashbuckler's class features are restricted by armor type and load.
Kouk 05-15-07, 11:11 PM	Mithral Bucklers are great for Wizards, Sorcerers and Rogues(though they don't need Mithral per se, it is lighter which is always good). Mithral is auto masterwork so 0 AC penalty, and the failure chance is 5 - 10% = -5% (which just becomes 0%).
runestar 05-16-07, 12:07 AM	You still take the -1 to hit when attacking with a 2-handed weapon, even with a mithral or masterwork buckler, since this penalty is independent of its ACP. But otherwise you are correct.:)
Kouk 05-16-07, 01:21 AM	You still take the -1 to hit when attacking with a 2-handed weapon, even with a mithral or masterwork buckler, since this penalty is independent of its ACP. But otherwise you are correct.:) Yeah, but when does that ever come up for those classes?:D And only with 2 handed melee weapons, bows don't count.
Leress 05-16-07, 02:43 AM	Yeah, but when does that ever come up for those classes?:D And only with 2 handed melee weapons, bows don't count. It comes up for rogues that Two weapon fight.
Kouk 05-16-07, 11:11 AM	It comes up for rogues that Two weapon fight. Touche!
Tectorman 05-16-07, 12:07 PM	Monks lose their monk AC and speed bonuses (and I think flurry of blows, could be wrong) when using any kind of armor or shield. Nope, the only (barring alternate class abilities and variant features) Monk class feature that gets interfered with by a shield is their Monk AC bonus. (If the weight of their shield puts them over their light load penalties, then, yeah, they lose those abilities, too, but I'm not counting that here) Furthermore, since you can upgrade a shield's damage via bashing, magically enchance it both as a defending weapon and as a shield, take Shield Specialization and Shield Ward (both in the PHB II, I think), using a shield is actually a good idea for a Monk.
Bukowski 05-16-07, 12:15 PM	per the SRD When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses her AC bonus, as well as her fast movement and flurry of blows abilities. Monks lose more than just the monk bonus to AC by using a shield.
Tectorman 05-16-07, 01:48 PM	From the SRD Under Monk Weapon and Armor Proficiency: When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses her AC bonus, as well as her fast movement and flurry of blows abilities. Under Monk AC Bonus: These bonuses to AC apply even against touch attacks or when the monk is flat-footed. She loses these bonuses when she is immobilized or helpless, when she wears any armor, when she carries a shield, or when she carries a medium or heavy load. Under Flurry of Blows: When unarmored, a monk may strike with a flurry of blows at the expense of accuracy. Under Fast Movement: At 3rd level, a monk gains an enhancement bonus to her speed, as shown on Table: The Monk. A monk in armor or carrying a medium or heavy load loses this extra speed. The top one mentions all three class features as being limited by armor, weight encumbrance, and carrying a shield. The Monk AC bonus says the same thing. The Flurry of Blows description (the important part which I've posted above {the only part of the description with any bearing on the matter, so no, I did not just ignore part of the text}) only says he must be unarmored. The Fast Movement says the Monk must be unarmored and unencumbered. All right, so why the discrepancies? One view is this: they wanted to limit all three class features the same way, so they wrote it out in full once to save on ink :rolleyes:. They did it again with the Monk AC Bonus because it was next in line, but they didn't feel it necessary to do so in the Flurry description because it had already been said a couple of times before. But wait. They went back to listing more limitations in the Fast Movement text. They didn't need to, so why? My take on that is this: they took the collective limitations for these three class abilities and wrote them all out in the initial description, whether they all applied or not. Later in each individual description, they clarified. Thus, Flurry of Blows says not one word about the person not wearing a shield (or only carrying a light load, for that matter). The same for the Fast Movement. I realize it's all in how you interpret intent, but until I see a link to a 3.5 FAQ or an official errata or a CustServ call, I am not proven wrong.
Kouk 05-16-07, 10:29 PM	I realize it's all in how you interpret intent, but until I see a link to a 3.5 FAQ or an official errata or a CustServ call, I am not proven wrong. It certainly is some kind of interpretation alright. You could make your own ticket to CustServ ya know ;) I interpret the first part with "as well as" meaning all of those things. As for the omissions later on, it doesn't say that those are the only possible circumstances that limit the ability, which means there could be others, like when they use a shield as was said in the first paragraph.
Tectorman 05-17-07, 12:33 PM	It certainly is some kind of interpretation alright. You could make your own ticket to CustServ ya know ;) I interpret the first part with "as well as" meaning all of those things. As for the omissions later on, it doesn't say that those are the only possible circumstances that limit the ability, which means there could be others, like when they use a shield as was said in the first paragraph. Nah, a.) I'm too lazy, and 2.) I'm a big fan of RAYW (Rule As You Want). Ask for advice from the boards, get input, but unless they're also in your campaign group, ignore them should you so desire. People forget this wonderful little fact and we get monstrosities like the "Tome of Battle: Too Anime?" boards (seriously, wear a helmet if you go over there). As for the actual topic on this board, we could argue "well, it says this here" and "but it says this here" all day and get nowhere. I have a difference of opinion. That is all.