Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Shield Master Feat (bug reintroduced - what is the right fix?)

Expand Messages
  • virtualjack@rocketmail.com
    I created DATA-1035 to deal with the first part. I m conflicted about the second part - I ll see how the first part is handled before making suggestions that
    Message 1 of 2 , Apr 8, 2013
      I created DATA-1035 to deal with the first part. I'm conflicted about the second part - I'll see how the first part is handled before making suggestions that may do more harm than good.

      ---Jack

      --- In PCGenListFileHelp@yahoogroups.com, "virtualjack@..." <virtualjack@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi,
      >
      > It looks like a bug got reintroduced in 6 with the Shield Master feat. The bonus entry reads
      >
      > BONUS:VAR|ShieldBashAttackBonus|var("ARMOR.SHIELD.EQUIPPED.0.ACBONUS") BONUS:VAR|ShieldBashDamageBonus|var("ARMOR.SHIELD.EQUIPPED.0.ACBONUS")
      >
      > but the ShieldBashAttackBonus variable isn't used anywhere. Also, it isn't ACBONUS it is enhancement bonus. The following syntax works
      >
      > BONUS:COMBAT|DAMAGE.Shieldbash|var("ARMOR.SHIELD.EQUIPPED.0.ACBONUS")-var("ARMOR.SHIELD.EQUIPPED.0.BASEAC")
      >
      > BONUS:COMBAT|TOHIT.Shieldbash|var("ARMOR.SHIELD.EQUIPPED.0.ACBONUS")-var("ARMOR.SHIELD.EQUIPPED.0.BASEAC")
      >
      >
      > So I was going to submit a bug report, but I am only 90% of the way there. The reason is that the Shield Master feat also takes care of the shield penalties for two weapon fighting.
      >
      > Unfortunately the TOHIT-SECONDARY field doesn't work quite the way that I'd like it to. So the question then becomes, should get modified. Does it make more sense to have TOHIT-SECONDARY as a valid modifier after COMBAT, or should it be a valid modifier after WEAPONPROF.
      >
      > i.e. which of the following is better?
      >
      > BONUS:WEAPONPROF=Shieldbash|TOHIT-SECONDARY|2
      >
      > or
      >
      > BONUS:COMBAT|TOHIT-SECONDARY.Shieldbash|2
      >
      > (to the best of my knowledge, neither work right now so this is an enhancement request).
      >
      > Also, would we go about differentiating between heavy and light penalties, or just assume that the person will use a light shield in the off hand?
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.