Talk:Energy Shield (3.5e Equipment)

Ratings

	Spanambula likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
	I'm giving this a like because I think it's a cool idea and has real potential. That having been said, it's a little too powerful for the current price, but instead of just upping the price I think a few minor tweaks would do the trick (see my suggested nerf about 5 indents into the "Cost" section).

	NProject opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	This equipment is hugely gamebreaking. Read the article discussion for more specifics.

I'm going to respond to your critiques below here because Spanambula has taken the most immediate reply slot.

1. First and foremost, this item is specifically balanced around the CWBL table given in the DMG, and the caveat that you are not allowed to spend more than ¹/₃ of your wealth on any one item. I will update the page to reflect this, since I understand some dungeon masters ignore them.
2. In your example you have two 3^rd level fighters squaring off, neither of whom should have more than 2,700 gold worth of items (and the most expensive item allowed to either should be capped at 900 gold) in accordance with the rules outlined above. This means a fighter would have to be 4^th level to afford the most basic 5 HP/round shield, or a 25 HP shield that recharges every five rounds.
3. Having expounded on these restrictions (and the errant assumptions made in your test), I would challenge you to run the simulation again with the proper items and declare this item unbalanced.
4. I cannot really recall the justification for the death effect immunity. It most likely stemmed from my belief that the shield should provide some protection against them, but that they should still have significant ramifications for the players. In retrospect, this is something that should be reflected in the base cost, or I should remove it. I am leaning toward the latter. In the case of the former, I would add a clause stating the players cannot be immune to the dazing effect.
5. "Literally dozens" - try three (a fourth level paladin spell -- when is the last time you had a paladin capable of casting fourth level spells?, a setting specific feat, and a Dragon Magazine LA+3 template). Yeah, maybe there's a few that thread didn't catch, but bad hyperbole is bad. Daze was specifically chosen because of the difficult in acquiring immunity in contrast with similar effects (stun).
6. The point about multiple shields is semi-relevant. Temporary hit points do not stack. This has always been the case. However, if someone were to expect the second shield to become active when the first is broken, therein lies the relevancy of your point. Your solution is dumb, regardless of players attempting to cheese, but I will append the article to make note of this.

Aaaaaand, I'm dumb. This is an armor enhancement, so there's no way to have two of these in effect on the same character anyway. -- Jota (talk) 18:32, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

-- Jota (talk) 18:16, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Author's Notes

• Intended more so for technology-based campaigns, where the 'enchantment' is purely technological, so to speak. If you want to suggest a different spell for a power level or one for all feel free to do so here.
• Cost is sort of based on expected monster damage and CWBL.
• If there's a singular boss monster benefitting from a shield, it should probably have quadruple (I think -- would depend further on party make-up and size) value relative to whatever would otherwise be appropriate.
• Mostly intended for games at the rogue-ish level where people are still killing each other with damage.

Anyhow, cooked this up real fast. Feel free to touch on anything I may have missed. -- Jota 06:12, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

._.

So, for 4,000 gp, I could have a shield that gives me 525,600,000 temporary hit points, and just have it have a 10 year recharge time? → Rith ^(talk) 10:35, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, nevermind, didn't catch the 5 round recharge time maximum first time through. Looks good → Rith ^(talk) 10:37, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that was my way of covering that particular issue. I am on top of things like that. -- Jota

WHAT? Don't change it, just imagine the look on that players face when the DM finds a way to render his shield useless for the next 10 YEARS, that would be to funny to pass up.--ThirdEmperor 02:53, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

Cost

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too cheap. Even a ring of Lesser Vigor is 1 hit point a round for 8000gp but ur doing 5 for 1000gp. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.128.175 (talk • contribs) at

You're ignoring the fact that the ring of lesser vigor actually grants fast healing, whereas this only grants temporary hit points. Unlike fast healing, it doesn't heal every round, which really only makes it valid for two occasions tops in a normal encounter (assuming around 5-8 rounds of combat, which is actually rather long and conservative of an estimate). Because of this, fast healing is much more useful on whole.

On a somewhat related note, WotC has a proven history of being retarded when it comes to pricing magical items and enchantments, which means that it's quite likely that they just had a fit of idiocy and totally overvalued fast healing 1 (because whoop-de-doo for one hp!). Just because they were wrong doesn't mean this has to follow suit. - TG Cid 20:39, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Unlike fast healing which is useful for replenishing health, the temporary hit points are more of a combat only thing, and they won't get you from combat A to combat B with full health. Also, at a listed price of 1000, assuming your DM doesn't let your spend everything you've got on one item, you won't be able to afford even the five value shield until level three, at which point five points a round is nice, but hardly gamebreaking. Furthermore, are you getting that price for a ring of lesser vigor as an at will (2000) first level spell (1) with a caster level of one (1) and a duration measured in rounds (4)? Because as mentioned, not only are WotC prices somewhat ridiculous at times, but if you change that to cure light wounds you quarter the price for more or less the same effect. So yeah. -- Jota 00:56, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

You said "but hardly gamebreaking" but I don't think you have simulated a battle yet-------------- Say you have two level 3 fighters, one with a +2 longsword (or rapier/greatsword/etc. -- cost 4000gp). The other fighter has your energy shield enchant (the 10 hp version -- cost 4000gp). We will assume the same stats and build for both of them, and make the fighter with your energy shield go last. We will also assume averaged rolls for both fighters, so both fighters will have 25hp (10 from first level; then 5,6 as hp rolls; plus a +2 bonus from con).

Longsword fighter hits Energy Shield fighter, does 8 damage (averaged d8 + 2 (STR) + 2 (enchant)) -- Energy Shield fighter has 27 hp left (25 self, 2 shield)

Energy Shield fighter hits Longsword fighter, does 6 damage (averaged d8 + 2 (STR)) -- Longsword fighter has 19 hp left

Longsword fighter hits Energy Shield fighter, does 9 damage -- Energy Shield fighter has 18 hp left

Energy Shield recharges -- Energy Shield fighter hits Longsword fighter, does 7 damage -- Longsword fighter has 12 hp left

Longsword fighter hits Energy Shield fighter, does 8 damage -- Energy Shield fighter has 20 hp left (18 self, 2 shield)

Energy Shield fighter hits Longsword fighter, does 6 damage -- Longsword fighter has 6 hp left.

Longsword fighter hits Energy Shield fighter, does 9 damage -- Energy Shield fighter has 11 hp left.

Energy Shield recharges -- Energy Shield fighter hits Longsword fighter, does 7 damage -- Longsword fighter dies.

Run that simulation again but give the longsword fighter a +3 longsword, he still loses. A +5 longsword? He still loses. A +8 longsword?! He still loses!! It turns out that your 10 hp every round enchant exactly cancels out a +10 longsword, whoever goes first wins. The longsword fighter would need a +11 longsword to win this fight. And that is with the cheap Energy Shield. This equipment is broken beyond all belief. Your 1000gp shield is the exact same power level as a 25000gp +5 weapon. Then you added on death spell immunity. This makes me think you didn't even think this item out, let alone playtest it.

" So you are telling me I can get an item, for 1000gp, that makes me immune to one death effect per round, AND it does other stuff?! Wait... the 'other stuff it does' cancels out a +5 weapon that my opponent bought? Sold! I'll buy 2! Wait, instead I'm gonna enchant both my armor and my bracers with this, that way they will overlap and I'll always have a shield up! Hey DM, can I enchant a buckler with this too?"

Yeah, this enchant needs lots of work. I'm putting my comments here just so that if my players find this item, I can show them this comment about how it's already banned from my games. If you really want this thing in your games, here's my suggestions. Change the amount of +'s this enchant counts for. A 5hp E. Shield that recharges every round directly counters a +5 weapon, so it should count as a +5 enchant. I think enchantment power, not price, should be X(shield size) times 3/(2+Y(recharge time)), so a 10hp shield that recharges in 4 rounds counts as a +5 enchantment. An 11 hp shield that recharges in 2 rounds counts as a +8 enchant. A 10 hp shield that recharges in 1 round counts as a +10 enchant. Therefore, a 5hp per round E. Shield would cost 25,000gp, a 10hp per round E. Shield would cost 100,000gp. Get rid of the death spell immunity. You said yourself this is made to be physical damage defense, not spell defense, so just dump it. If you really want to keep it, add on 128,000gp to the price, just like soulfire enchantment (the only other enchant I could find that gives death effect immunity). Don't even think of saying "but it dazes you when it blocks a death effect, it should be cheaper". A quick internet search will show you literally a dozen easy ways to make yourself immune to daze. Also, you really need to add something to the enchant description that says "Two energy shields cannot be worn by the same person. If a creature attempts to equip two items with the Energy Shield enchantment, the two enchantments will resonate off each other, and after 3 seconds (one standard action) will explode. This explosion destroys both items and the creature wearing them, and does 10d6 damage to all creatures within a 30' radius." If you don't add a paragraph like this, very shortly all your players will be wearing double and triple overlapping energy shields. And to all my players... "don't even think about it!" -- NProject

First of all, why do these hypothetical 3rd level fighters have 4,000 gp items? WBL for 3rd level is 2,700. I don't know what DMG you're looking at, but mine says that a +2 longsword is 8,000, not 4. (Kind of irrelevant, but it bothered me.) Additionally, saying you need a +11 weapon is ludicrous when you could, I don't know, just use power attack, which your longsword fighter should have anyway. The point is, I don't know why you're so shocked and alarmed that given 2 equal fighters, the one with the better gear wins. By that logic, a longsword fighter in full plate fighting a longsword fighter in a chain shirt is similarly overpowered because he's harder to damage by being harder to hit.

Do I think this is underpriced? Yes, but not terribly so. I'd like to see the death ward effect have a flat 5 round recharge time, but in and of itself it's not game-breaking. Death Ward armor gives you immunity 1/day for a +1 price, and Greater Crystals of Lifekeeping are only 5,000. If you want to freak out about this thing, go ahead and ban it in your games, but it's really not nearly as bad as your silly sample fight makes it out to be.

(Also yes, you COULD also take this on a buckler as well, but since temp HP from the same source (multiple items that do the same thing) doesn't stack, it would just be a waste of money.) Spanambula (talk) 00:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I've been thinking about it, and here's how I would nerf it if I was going to use it in one of my games:

The energy shield can only be purchased in increments of 5, which is conveniently already priced. No more doing math formulas, you're welcome. The shield starts out at full power, and after you take damage, it regenerates 1/5 of it's base power every round until it regains full power. So for example, if you have an energy shield giving you 10 temp HP, and you take 10 damage, your shield is gone. Next round at the beginning of your turn the shield recharges by 1/5th, or 2 temp HP. Then the next round 2 more temp HP. If you get hit again, it just keeps refreshing by 1/5th every round until it hits full strength. That way you get an edge at the start of combat, about equal to a pre-combat buff, and a smaller amount of temp HP each round in combat, which is helpful but not overpowering.

The death ward effect should stay the same, but only functions while the shield is at full power. That should limit it's use saving your PC from a really nasty trap, and maybe helping out about once per combat encounter, which is about on par with the 3x/day cheap stuff in the MIC. Spanambula (talk) 02:26, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

1. You cannot take this on a buckler. It is an armor enhancement.
2. My original inspiration was Halo, so I did not want the shield to regenerate in between rounds. This would make the shield more valuable than it already is and sort of defeats the points of having an opening in which to really go at your opponents (which exists with the multiple round recharge time shields).

-- Jota (talk) 18:36, 27 March 2014 (UTC)