Works with creatures that hurl too. Very nice.

A triton combatant puts a razor-tined pale green trident in her canvas bandolier.
The triton combatant removes a seaweed-wound rusted steel hatchet from within her canvas bandolier, drawing it back adroitly up to her head.
A triton combatant throws a seaweed-wound rusted steel hatchet at you!
At the last moment, you block the missile with your pavis!
You manage to block with the exact angle needed to deflect the attack right back at the triton combatant!
AS: +404 vs DS: +43 with AvD: +23 + d100 roll: +19 = +403
... and hits for 90 points of damage!
Slashing blow to chest knocks the triton combatant back a few paces!
Momentum carries a seaweed-wound rusted steel hatchet past a triton combatant to land nearby.
The rusted steel hatchet flies past you, disappearing into the local environs.

-Richard/Fjalar.

>I said I am against any improvement to shield mechanics that improve defense against ranged weapons based on creatures using ranged weapons, that ranged weapons themselves are not as overpowering as they were when first created. That a number of improvements have come to be including enhansive items that greatly effect the balance. I can go back an quote the post myself, but that is the jist of what I was saying, and I think my words were that with all the more recent changes in other areas Ranged could use some attention itself.
GILBERTJ26

So ranged is only slightly overpowered now?

I'm just really having trouble seeing how ranged was having all these issues, prior to this release, that it needs attention. Enhancives have greatly affected the balance? Not seeing that either.

I also fail to see how a handful of the newly released SHIELD maneuvers hurts ranged so horribly. What exactly are you hunting that you're having so much difficulty now that the new SHIELD maneuvers will hurt you so badly?

What about OHE users? There's quite a few SHIELD maneuvers that will affect them too. Twohanders? Poles? How exactly is staff supposed to release anything?


>yes, and that is based on an offensive stance.. whatever modifiers of that nature there are go up as you move more towards defensive.

.. you do realize this is still not a flat 50% block rate just by holding a shield (like you've claimed). Right?

-farmer

I don't think it works on PCs.

><The goal of this release is to provide new capabilities to the shield use character builds within the martial classes, so that those character builds can better compete with the powerful twohanded and ranged weapon builds.>

>Since CVC issues Im told are never the reason for cman, spell or other type changes or introductions then it must be to balance against critter attacks.
GILBERTJ26

You misunderstand. Again.

The key word in the phrase you quoted is 'WITH'. This does not say 'AGAINST'. The updates aren't for CVC. No game design is based on CVC. They're to encourage shield builds and increase their overall power. Power that twohand/polearm and archer builds already have.

Twohand/Polearm builds and archery are the most dominant builds in the game. For a reason. Regardless of what you personally feel about the state of archery (continually subject to downgrades, needing improvements, etc), a majority of the game population feels differently.

Martial Shield builds, (and 'martial' is another key word since pure shield use is plenty powerful and magical semis are fine too,) on the other hand suffer from a whole host of problems that the new improvements sought, and succeeded IMO, in addressing.


>Now as far as CVC goes, I already think its very difficult to be like level an do much to seriously injure a full plate wall shield holding opponent, this will just make them almost impossible to injure. However there are other methods to use in CVC so, its not that important.

You say it's not important, but you've brought up CVC almost every post I think. Regardless, even in CVC situations, the likelyhood of encountering this specific combination is absurdly low. Be serious now. If you think there were a lot of ACTIVE shield using Warriors/Rogues/Paladins AND wearing full plate, then you're still stuck in GS3 when we had real redux. Now? Even with the changes, I seriously doubt that this combination is going to outnumber the amount of twohand/pole or archer builds. Nor is the overall power scale going to shift to shield users being the highest.

Also, while a Warrior/Rogue/Paladin with a tower shield and fullplate might be hard for an archer to deal with, it certainly isn't as bad as you've said it was earlier (flat 50% just for holding a shield and scaling higher).


>If you want a simple example why I am agitated with this, Rangers and most other semis have a list if cmans available but most of them are not worth the points it takes to master. I applaud the efforts put into this, but Id rather see a cman or some improvement in the semis spells over a cman intended as I said to protect against a small group of creatures, that are not that overpowering. (creatures using ranged weapons, that dont even exist in some of the towns and or beyond the age of 30 trains in other towns.)

1. Rangers don't need help. None. Period. They don't need Cmans or spell improvements to do well. (Key word here is 'Need', not to be confused with 'should never get improvements'.) They already do. Look at yourself, you're already a capped (maybe even post) archer ranger and haven't needed any new Cmans or spell updates. Warrior, Rogue and Paladin shield builds though, did need help to do as well as other builds.

2. Creatures throw weapons at all levels. In all towns. And while I know you're quick to dismiss Grimswarm and Bandits, there's no valid reason to. So, really, it's not that small of a group when you look at the entire game setting.

3. Being honest, it really just seems that you only want improvements to help you and nobody else. The part about it being targeted at a 'small group of creatures' is just an add-on argument to seem less greedy.
3a. For full disclosure, none of the SHIELD changes affect me. I don't use shields and don't plan to. Still, I approve of, and have always encouraged, any improvement to shield builds.

-farmer

Coase!
In all the discussion I did not properly tell you its clear a great amount of work was put into these, and It is appreciate by me. I dont want to leave the impression there is anything poorly done in your efforts. All of my concerns have been about only one or two of the maneuvers, and my greatest fears several people have said aren't going to happen or I am misunderstanding.

Thank you for you efforts and likely volunteered timem the same to the other GMs we dont see as often that keep making GS a better game!!

I'm gonna second this recommendation from Arch. Paladins are ostensibly semis with just as much magical cache as bards and rangers and they have access to the new shield system which if nothing else frees up cman points if you use shield charge or bash.

Is there some reasoning behind giving these new maneuvers to some squares but not all, ie monks, and one semi profession, but not others?

Thanks

>I'm not arguing against other semi's getting the maneuver (I'll leave that to Farmer)
E

Heh.

I said when SHIELD Maneuvers were released that I think at least Phalanx should be available to all. I don't think a collection of group-based SHIELD Maneuvers is out of place, or shouldn't happen. However..


>I believe the idea is that Paladins are the most physical of the semi's. Their physical costs are lower than the other two for shields, with them paying 3/0 versus Bards/rangers 5/0. They also pay more for spells than rangers and bards, and their spells in combat are less effective due to their build being designed to hunt primarily with weapons.

This pretty much sums up why I think Paladins should have access to them (and in fact I've posted about wanting access to more).


>Paladins are ostensibly semis with just as much magical cache as bards and rangers and they have access to the new shield system which if nothing else frees up cman points if you use shield charge or bash.
BLOBUE

As E mentioned in his post (above), Paladins are the most physical semi. The profession simply does not have 'just as much magical cache as bards and rangers'. We just can't do a majority of the magical things that Rangers or Bards can and this is due to the design for the profession. And to address your last part about freed CMan points, there just aren't a lot of shield users among Paladins. Polearms and Twohanders make up a large majority of the profession. Despite the profession being built to use shield, there just wasn't enough reason or advantage to using a shield. Having access to the new SHIELD Maneuvers should change that, but I don't see it becoming more dominant than the twohanded weapon approach.


>Is there some reasoning behind giving these new maneuvers to some squares but not all, ie monks, and one semi profession, but not others?

SHIELD Maneuvers is a system designed to help the more physical professions be successful with a shield build when compared to the other weapon builds (Ranged, Pole, 2hd. There's a reason that it was rare to see a profession, especially a Warrior, Rogue or Paladin, use a shield. This update should help the build immensely and encourage more shield builds.

Warriors and Rogues get the bulk of them naturally, being very physical squares. Monks, despite being a square, are not designed to be heavy shield users (if you doubt this look at the TP cost), but could very well change in the future. Paladins, being the most physical Semi, lack a lot of the power that Bards and Rangers have and most importantly are designed to use shields (based on the spell list and TP cost).





-farmer

I'm fine with rangers not having shield skills but as a trade off can we finally get some combat manuvers that are worth training in?

Keith/Brinret/Shiun

ATTENTION: Monks were only designed to reach level 39. Please check into the nearest Inn and choose the retire option immediately before you break the game completely!

Being the rare shield-using paladin, I'm pleased with the new toys to play with, although I'n with Farmer and wish more came our way.