Shields are Worthless

[Morfedel]

Is it my imagination, or are Shields worthless?

Reading it: you get the same bonuses to parrying with shields as you do with any other WP.

And, shields have SDC they take when parrying with them; swords do not.

Therefore, if you parry with a shield, it gets shredded; if you parry with a sword, it does not.

Have I missed something? If not... no offense, Palladium Fantasy is packed with flavor, but this is just moronic.

[Reagren Wright]

If I'm not mistaken, the damage done to a shield's SDC only occurs when
your target the weapon to deliberately damage it. Just like weapons have
their own SDC as well. Your trying to break the sword. So you could parry
with a shield all day long and it will be still be as good as new. However,
it would also depend upon what your parrying against. A leather shield
is not going to last long against a troll using a giant size battle axe. I
do agree the parry bonus with a shield is not all that great.
I believe the bonuses go like +1 at levels 1, 3, 5, 7 and so on.
It should be at least +2 at level one and then go up 1 every
other level that way its not the same as swords and blunt.

[MADMANMIKE]

..Blame Paired weapons. Off hands are -6 to do anything in combat, except use a shield, unless this skill is taken. The fact that anyone can take it makes every character ambidextrous in combat.

..Also, looking at Sword, the Shield gets their bonuses to parry one level earlier than Sword.

..If you want a realistic game, don't let everyone have Paired Weapons and issue shields. And what he said above, the shield only loses SDC when deliberately targeted.

-Mike >8]

[sinestus]

right, there are some things you can't block with a sword as easilly...

like as previously mentioned with arrows and the like...

without modding the rules (depending on how you look at it) the shield is still useful for the "sacrifice" maneuver (like a mech can do when defending against missiles)...
back when i ran PFRPG games we always allowed the use of a shield as a sacrifice/block against magic projectiles...

and made it cheaper for a shield to get better balancing for parry boni...

[Rimmer]

Actually i find sheilds more or less useless in every palladium game that i have played, with one exception, PFRPG 1st ED.

[maasenstodt]

Actually i find sheilds more or less useless in every palladium game that i have played, with one exception, PFRPG 1st ED.

I would agree, though if you count the arm shields on the various Southern Cross mecha as such, they'd have to be included.

Yet another reason why 1st Ed. is so vastly superior to 2nd.

[Adam of the Old Kingdom]

I give the shield itself a bonus that stacks with that of the WP.
thus making shields natualy better, no matter what your skill level is.

[Veknironth]

Well, I agree with MMM on the paired weapons. That was one of the worst things they did with the 2nd edition, opening it to all classes. As the rules are, sheilds aren't that great. The bonuses to parry are too close, and you can have a dwarven weapon made weapon that is better than a sheild. I haven't seen any superiorly crafted sheilds in the book, but that might help.

A way to mitigate this is to use a little common sense. It won't fly with your rules lawyers, but you can still try it. There are just somethings you can't parry with a sword/axe/whatever. You can't parry a mace and chain with a sword very easily. You can't parry a whip, flail, arrow, thrown object, etc. Assigne huge penalties (-10?) to parry with such a weapon but not with a shield. That might change people's minds.

-Vek
"Nick Fury did well with SHEILD."

[Goliath Strongarm]

"Nick Fury did well with SHEILD."

HAHAHHAHAHA Now THAT brings back some memories... rofl... omg...

And Rimmer, as for 1st edition being superior to 2nd.... was there EVER any doubt?

--
GS

[Morfedel]

Well, we came up with a rule that a shield had a parry bonus equal to, uhm, either 1/10th or 1/5th of the shield's SDC rating. I can't remember which.

It made it a bit easier.


I was unaware that the sdc for the shield was only when the shield was targetted. It does make a difference, but still, think about this: if you are fighting someone else, neither of you with paired weapons, the you can parry roughly as well with a sword as with a shield. Its no more than +1 off each other. You are just as good parrying with the sword as the shield.

We also allowed shields to be used against missile weapons in the following manner; you could put it in front of you, effectively hiding behind it (think of a shield wall); the same bonus we gave for parrying above we used to add to your AR against missile weapons; any hit between your armor's AR and the bonus by the shield hit the shield instead.


Which reminds me. Maybe it was just me, but it also seemed that armor also was kinda screwed. With the weaker armors (armor rating 9 for soft leather if I recall correctly), the armor would intercept less than half the blows if the opponent had any kind of bonuses whatsoever.

Furthero, most armors didnt last more than a few fights; yes, I know, the characters ccould try and do armor repair between fights, but if we are doing a kind of ye olde dungeon crawl, then they dont have the time to stop after every single fight.

We watched as the fighters' platemail was sheered off completely after a few fights with tougher opponents. It became a joke that the PCs would buy a literal cartfull of plate armor to replace their old ones.

So, we made another houserule for armor: that all armor had a damage resistance equal to its AR / 5; if an attack hit the armor, then the attack was lowered in damage by the damage resistance. If the attack got PAST the armor, then the armor took from the attack (and lost from its own DC) damage equal to its damage resistance.

This way, that stupid armor with an AR of 6 actually had some use, and plate armor was just a bit more survivable.

That didnt fix everything though; I remember the day that the summoner of the group hit 4th level, and started summoning greater elementals, and commanding them to summon lesser elementals. We became spectators as the summoner had an entire army who could do far more than we could.

So we houseruled that just because the greater elemental was under his control didnt mean the lesser ones were; they were summoned as friends, not slaves, and would work to free their "brother."

Then the priest, whose healing touch could heal anyone but themselves up to full after each battle, if they survived; have two in the group, and they will never be lower than max hit points at the start of a battle, barring the death of one of the priests.


It goes on and on. Man, I have to admit, Palladium is fantastic for flavor! But we just had to houserule SO MANY items from it that, when 3rd edition D&D came out, we switched - mostly because it was a far smoother system.

But it lacked the wonderful flavor possessed by Palladium; I REALLY wish they would come out with a third edition - one that fixed all of these problems and got the darned thing a bit cleaner and smoother.

*sigh*

[Killer Cyborg]

Several thoughts:

1. Does a shield count as a weapon, or as armor?

If it counts as armor, then there are some nifty armor enchantments.
-Armor Rating Enhancement: in the case of a shield, this should probably count as a parry bonus. (Or just add it to your armor's AR.)
-Invisibility cost 12,000 gold on Armor, 25,000 gold for a weapon.
-Buoyancy would be kind of cool... portable flotation device. You don't have to worry about drowing, but you don't have to waste an enchantment slot in your actual armor.
-I don't have Western Empires, but there are some cool armor enchantments in it that would be cool on a shield.

If it counts as a weapon, then it can be made Indestructible (in addition to any other enchantments to increase damage, return when thrown, etc.)

2. A shield can be used for cover in some circumstances. This is easier to do with Large shields, though. Basically, you might rule that it requires a called shot to make it past a shield (either of a certain size, or any size under certain circumstances).
Also, a group of adventurers with shields can all hold them overhead interlocked to form one big shield against aerial monsters/attacks
This works well if you count Shields as weapons and can make them indestructable.

3. Some secure places may require you to check your sword at the gate, but allow you to keep your shield.

4. You may rule that certain attacks, like missile weapons, can only be parried with a shield.

5. It may not be useful, but I always thought it would be cool to have a character with paired shields.

[Borast]

Well... look at the way a shield has been used historically.

The members of a phalynx overlapped their shields in the front, and the later ranks held them over head. Made the unit damn near invulnerable to missile fire smaller than a 2-3 pound rock fired from a catapult.
If you're charging archers, hold it up so that they cannot hit your head. So, when blocking arrows, the shield has no penalty, and it can even (when properly used in formation fighting) block missile barrages passively (ie: gives the members of the unit an effective AR of 19)...

Oh, and as for loosing SDC...not on a parry, but if/when you BLOCK with it, the attacker does damage to the shield (and depending on the weapon, can break bones, spring ALL the joints in the arm, knock you down, etc), and in the absolute worst case scenario, kill you anyway... (a certain sword that uses a doubling cube for it's damage comes to mind...128 points of damage can be REALLY lethal...

[Cranus]

MADMANMIKE wrote:
..Blame Paired weapons. Off hands are -6 to do anything in combat, except use a shield, unless this skill is taken. The fact that anyone can take it makes every character ambidextrous in combat.

..Also, looking at Sword, the Shield gets their bonuses to parry one level earlier than Sword.

..If you want a realistic game, don't let everyone have Paired Weapons and issue shields. And what he said above, the shield only loses SDC when deliberately targeted.

I know the Shield bonuses are located on the cutting room floor but where is the -6 off hand and shields don't take damage from "regular" attacks mentioned?

[Adam of the Old Kingdom]

MADMANMIKE wrote:
..Blame Paired weapons. Off hands are -6 to do anything in combat, except use a shield, unless this skill is taken. The fact that anyone can take it makes every character ambidextrous in combat.

..Also, looking at Sword, the Shield gets their bonuses to parry one level earlier than Sword.

..If you want a realistic game, don't let everyone have Paired Weapons and issue shields. And what he said above, the shield only loses SDC when deliberately targeted.

I know the Shield bonuses are located on the cutting room floor but where is the -6 off hand and shields don't take damage from "regular" attacks mentioned?

not sure where it is mentioned, but it is a general rule (again can't reference) that unless specificaly targeted weapons and shields to not take damage. it does state however that shields will need to be replaced regularly as they will get beaten up and shabby, just not in a game mechanic sort of way.

paired weapon WP is poorly worded and implemented. it's a house rule situation.

[Adam of the Old Kingdom]

with only 5% of players having a PP bonus it's a bit overkill to have no PP and the -4, particularly when you consider if the opponent has the WP. that's a hell of a whack.

I take it thats the rule you play by, and it works out OK. how often do player find themselves with a weapon they do not have a WP for?

Everythign else looks good, just asking about the PP thing.

[J. Lionheart]

I basically look at it as one of the differences between role playing and roll playing. Roll players will have every single person using paired weapons no matter what, because it is "better." Role players may or may not have paired weapons, depending on what fits the character and the vision for their background.

[Severite]

according to the way mages are viewed in general..........they train to be able to cast that fire spell of doom........pretty much how that fighter learns to use the sword the right way. While I dont say wizards shouldn't be able to use a sword, I dont think he should be able to master it to the point of dual wielding a pair without seriously impacting his studies.....

[Adam of the Old Kingdom]

i agree with your rules, just not the bit about denying PP bonus.

-4 for no WP
-6 to parry a hurled weapon.
Paired weapons costiing 2 skill picks for non MaA OCCs.

Adam
answer for using a weapon they have no wp for... they only get pp bonus if they are using it and a shield... or of trying to use 2 of those... i'm a cruel GM... i increase the penalty to -6 and no pp bonus

but i dent penalise them if they want to use weapon and shield.

you lost me there a bit. can you restate this.

if they have wp shield i also allow them to use it to parry arrows/ bolts... but they cant use it parry machine propelled weapons e.g. ballista etc

yes, while the mechanics don't cover seige weapons specificly, it is (un)common sense to not be easy to parry a ballista.





("You're going to backstab him, with a balista?")

[Adam of the Old Kingdom]

yes, while the mechanics don't cover seige weapons specificly, it is (un)common sense to not be easy to parry a ballista.


("You're going to backstab him, with a balista?")

Unless your a Titan or simularly giant sized

but a ballista is more like a largish hand weapon to a giant.
that's one of those nice things an enemy does not want to see as a Titan bats a ballista projectile out of the way.

[Natalya]

I give the shield itself a bonus that stacks with that of the WP.
thus making shields natualy better, no matter what your skill level is.

I like that idea. I think I'm going to use it for my game.

[Sentinel]

I came up with a house rule made from modifying existing mechanics based on shield usage in HU and PFRPG ( a certain super soldier used a shield in Justice Machine Sourcebook).
If the shield is being targeted, it takes damage equal to 10% of the attack, until it is destroyed.
If the shield is not the specific target, then it takes no damage.
If the shield user fails to parry, well, you know what happens.

[J. Lionheart]

Going through this thread, I've become confused. Are shields considered Armors or Weapons? I've seen mentions of one, or the other, but haven't seen any mentions of it within the books.

For myself, I've always considered it Armor, and as such eligible for armor enhancements. A player of mine once comissionned an Alchimist to prepare him a large iron shield with a strong Continual Glow enchantment. His idea was to distract his opponents when engaged in battle by blinding him with the light, thus making it harder to parry his strikes.

He died before claiming his prize though, and then decided to create another character, thus forgetting all about the magic shield.

Well, shields don't have A.R., are carried instead of worn, and you learn to use it by taking a Weapon Proficiency. Furthermore, their combat statistics are the same used for weapons, and they can be wielded to do damage. I consider them weapons.

[The Immortal ME]

My solution would probably be:

Sheilds carry an inate bonus based on their type. +1 buckler, +2 for small, or whatever.

They can recieve bonuses to parry (and strike and damage, if you really want) just like weapons. Looking over the list, all kobold/dwarven weapon types have the same +XXX% for the same +Y to parry, so just copy/paste into a "shield" category.

Limit wp:paired by OCC unless you can come up with a really good excuse.

Also, when a shield is used to block an attack -- an arrow, a giant smashing you with a mace as big as you are, or a dragon's breath attack -- the shield takes full damage from the attack (unless the attack does more damage than the sheild can take, in which case it is obliterated and you (may?) take the rest). When used to parry an attack, it doesn't take any damage.

[Adam of the Old Kingdom]

my understanding of the rules is.

Shields are classified as weapons
they only take damage if targeted.
Shields are viable recipients of master working (dwarven etc) and magic properties.
Shields need to be replaced every 6 months or so as they deteriate from use. (no mechanic for this, just GMs discression)

Sheilds seem to be overlooked for mechanical effect in the books.
I like shields as a form of cover from oponents that are not seen or not in the combatants current field of awareness. providing a penalty to strike.
also omited is the shields specific parry bonus inherant for it's size and weight.

[ghost2020]

I've always gone with which ever gives the best parry bonus (shield or sword) the player can take it.

If they have a shield, they're also able to "parry" arrows instead of dodging, maybe a small bonus for 'cover' or some sort of reconsidering for a failed save or a dodge if they're really close.

Also, all armor, in my house rules, all armor only takes 10% of the damage, just to get some longevity out of it. Shields get replaced as we think of it, or as situations dictate.

[Suicycho]

I love the idea of a shield adding to the AR of the armor. I wish i would have thought of it first...