Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Bliss Bull Shield Sleaze Question?

Bliss Bull Shield Sleaze Question? 6 years 3 weeks ago #25

Brad Mortensen wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: I think the rule should be that your ranged shield must be melee shield (if you have one) or an Archers Buckler, whether it’s part of a set or not, just to avoid all these headaches.


Would that prevent a player using a two handed weapon in Melee from using a shield in ranged?


No.

I’m trying to say that, if you’re using a shield in melee and in ranged, then it’s the same shield. Unless your ranged weapon is two-handed - then you can use a Buckler instead.


The rules do not meed to mention the archers buckler; token rules can (and do) override the general rules. So the archers buckler can just allow itself to be equipped regardless of any shield used in melee.

As another example of token overriding rules - mithral longsword can be equipped in ranger off-hand.
this is not a signature.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Bliss Bull Shield Sleaze Question? 6 years 3 weeks ago #26

Matthew Hayward wrote: it doesn't seem to be covered explicitly in the rules

Do you feel the previously excerpted rules from the DMG, QTR, and beta PHB do not cover this topic sufficiently? If not, what would you add?

Matthew Hayward wrote: 2. This confusion is seeded in part because of how set bonuses work, where the set bonus powers for things held in hands do convey their set bonuses at all times, and not only when held (although under tougher re-equipping restrictions).

As has been mentioned previously in this thread, we can all thank the Mithral set for this issue. Continually switching stats between 5th-level and 4th-level every time a player switched between melee and ranged combat would be a royal PITA. The compromise was to keep the set bonus, but lose the individual item bonus. Maybe that's not the most elegant fix, but it sure beats the alternative.

Matthew Hayward wrote: All current character builders I am familiar with perform calculations in violation of the rules you have expressed here

Thank you for reporting that issue.
Have you looked it up in the TDb ?
Please post TDb corrections in this thread .
If I write something in teal, it should not be taken seriously

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Druegar. Reason: fixed minor grammar error

Bliss Bull Shield Sleaze Question? 6 years 2 weeks ago #27

This only really became an issue again by us adding a strength bonus to a shield. In retrospect, we should really just avoid applying bonuses to handhelds that we don't want to remain in perpetuity regardless of whether the item is equipped in both melee and ranged (e.g. shields). AC is fine because we track that individually and pure adds/subtracts to the to hit/damage are fine for the same reason. Strength should be expressed as to hit and damage instead of being an actual bonus to strength for handhelds.

We can't unring that bell, but we can try to keep it basically to the handful of items that exist today:

Bliss Bull Shield (+1 Strength)
Darkling Shield (+1 Reflex)
Fae Yew Shield (+1 Fortitude)
Nixie Shield (+1 Reflex)
Redoubt Shield (-2 Fortitude)
Orb of Might (+2 Strength)

Since we do not track Melee/Ranged saving throws, there isn't much to be done about sleaze from them.

With the remaining 2, I considered converting them to their respective effects:

Orb of Might is easy because we can simply have it be +1 to hit and +1 to damage for melee only instead of +2 Strength. The only remaining item for this one is to still consider it in the computation of strength for comparison to a minimum strength weapon.

Bliss Bull Shield becomes effectively +1 to hit; +1 damage when in melee offhand slot - that part is easy. And like the Orb of Might, the +1 for strength still needs to be used for minimum strength weapon computations. The Ranged Offhand gets a bit messier since a +1 strength could be a +1 or a +0 to thrown weapon damage.

The only other alternative I see is to maintain a separate Strength for Melee and Ranged which seems a bit extreme for 2 tokens, but would make the minimum strength and thrown damage calculations a bit easier.

We've been expressing the concerns from a generator perspective, but as we continue to make calculations more complex, we also make it tougher on the coaches to process quickly and accurately. While I know it limits creativity a little bit in token design, we really need to avoid making the melee vs. ranged any more complicated than it already is.

Update: I chose to separate the Strengths. I will be publishing the updated spreadsheet shortly.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Amorgen Burke.

Bliss Bull Shield Sleaze Question? 6 years 2 weeks ago #28

I can only come up with one item that has a minimum strength requirement. That is the Maul of the Titans , which requires a 24 strength to wield.

I get that if the Bliss Bull Shield is equipped in the Ranged Offhand slot, the bonus does not apply for melee weapons, but what about in terms of meeting the strength requirement to wield?

To this point the Orb of Might has applied, but I am not sure there is an example relative to minimum strength. For that matter, there has been only one Strength parameter. Now we may need separate stats for Ranged vs Melee.

This will all matter a lot more if a future shield provides a Dexterity or Wisdom or Intelligence bonus. I would recommend against this, but the precedent has been set.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Bliss Bull Shield Sleaze Question? 6 years 2 weeks ago #29

Since I really don't want to add any more versions of attributes (strength was enough), I can't express strongly enough against adding any additional attributes (dex, wis, etc.) to shields.

Now that I've split Strength, it isn't a big deal one way or the other as for future handheld tokens that affect strength.

To your point, Cranston, the way I made the split precludes the ranged offhand shield being considered for meeting minimum strength. This would be in keeping with the rules as they stand and since we went down this road so far, I would stand behind the shield's strength bonus not counting toward the Maul's minimum as it wouldn't be equipped while actually using the Maul. If any set bonus pieces reside in the ranged offhand that triggers a set strength bonus, the way I did it will still count the set bonus strength even toward the Maul (e.g. Redoubt set utilizing Redoubt Shield).

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Bliss Bull Shield Sleaze Question? 6 years 2 weeks ago #30

Amorgen Burke wrote: Since I really don't want to add any more versions of attributes (strength was enough), I can't express strongly enough against adding any additional attributes (dex, wis, etc.) to shields.

Now that I've split Strength, it isn't a big deal one way or the other as for future handheld tokens that affect strength.

To your point, Cranston, the way I made the split precludes the ranged offhand shield being considered for meeting minimum strength. This would be in keeping with the rules as they stand and since we went down this road so far, I would stand behind the shield's strength bonus not counting toward the Maul's minimum as it wouldn't be equipped while actually using the Maul. If any set bonus pieces reside in the ranged offhand that triggers a set strength bonus, the way I did it will still count the set bonus strength even toward the Maul (e.g. Redoubt set utilizing Redoubt Shield).

I totally agree.

I will add a split on strength in the next version. it will also fix the issue where the Orb of Might adds the strength bonus to a Mighty ranged weapon.

I will also add a restriction preventing the use of 2 different shields between melee and range. (Archer's Buckler and any other item not containing the word shield will not be affected) If you equip a shield in one offhand slot, that will be the only 'shield' that appears in the list for the other offhand slot. While the rules allow that condition, assuming it is not set related, having different shields equipped frequently causes stat conflicts. Rather than have the coaches have to police this, it seems better to have the app prevent it.

Those modifications will come out in May.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Bliss Bull Shield Sleaze Question? 5 years 10 months ago #31

  • quip
  • quip's Avatar
  • Offline
  • 9th Level
  • Supporter
  • I like trains...
  • Posts: 1268

Cranston wrote:
it will also fix the issue where the Orb of Might adds the strength bonus to a Mighty ranged weapon.



I understand that for the bows.

Shouldn't the orb of might (assuming equipped in the ranged offhand slot) add a strength bonus for a (+1) Mighty Sling, since those are one handed?

I take it this won't affect one hand thrown weapons (dagger, spear, trident, hammer, etc)?
Winner of a Ring of Focus (that is now a Relsa's Ring of Focus) at Raven's awesome pickpocketing event at TD Tavern in 2008.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by quip.

Bliss Bull Shield Sleaze Question? 5 years 10 months ago #32

quip wrote:

Cranston wrote:
it will also fix the issue where the Orb of Might adds the strength bonus to a Mighty ranged weapon.



I understand that for the bows.

Shouldn't the orb of might (assuming equipped in the ranged offhand slot) add a strength bonus for a (+1) Mighty Sling, since those are one handed?

I take it this won't affect one hand thrown weapons (dagger, spear, trident, hammer, etc)?

The short answer is that the Orb of Might only affects melee weapons, and not affect ranged weapons of any kind. As noted by Aegoce:

Aegoce wrote: I think this explanation from the the set bonuses section of the 2018 PHB covers the loss of a strength bonus when the item providing the bonus is an off-hand item in the other attack mode slot as sort of an aside. I don't know if it is covered directly anywhere else or if it's in previous versions of the document


You may temporarily swap one or both hand-held set-piece items (either melee for ranged or ranged for melee) and maintain the set’s bonus. However, the bonuses granted by the individual “lost” item(s) won’t apply. E.g., a ranger using SCEPTER, ORB, and BOOTS OF MIGHT to gain a level may swap out the scepter and orb to use a ranged weapon, but may not use any other melee weapons. During the swap-out, the ranger loses the +2 Strength bonus granted by the ORB OF MIGHT, but maintains the +1 level granted by the Might set.

So in your example 3, I think you would maintain the defender set bonus in both melee and ranged, but would only have the strength bonus in ranged. I'm pretty sure this is considered sleazy by at least a subset of coaches but appears to be allowed.


And per the token database: Orb of Might

"This item is no longer equippable in the ranged offhand slot. It can only be equipped in the melee offhand slot."

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Bliss Bull Shield Sleaze Question? 5 years 10 months ago #33

Cranston wrote: And per the token database: Orb of Might
"This item is no longer equippable in the ranged offhand slot. It can only be equipped in the melee offhand slot."

Cranston gets a cookie!

This image is hidden for guests.
Please log in or register to see it.

Have you looked it up in the TDb ?
Please post TDb corrections in this thread .
If I write something in teal, it should not be taken seriously

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Bliss Bull Shield Sleaze Question? 5 years 10 months ago #34

  • quip
  • quip's Avatar
  • Offline
  • 9th Level
  • Supporter
  • I like trains...
  • Posts: 1268
Thanks, I wasn't aware of the addition of that errata, which I take it was to avoid previous "orb sleaze".

Disappointing that it is no longer usable for what would previously have been a legitimate use...
No Thor's Hammer with Orb of Might then. :(
Winner of a Ring of Focus (that is now a Relsa's Ring of Focus) at Raven's awesome pickpocketing event at TD Tavern in 2008.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.097 seconds