Shrouded in Shadows: Stealthy Magic Weapons in Pathfinder 2e

In the world of Pathfinder 2e, magic weapons hold a special place for adventurers seeking to enhance their combat abilities. These weapons are imbued with mystical energies and often possess unique properties that can greatly aid those who wield them. Magic weapons in Pathfinder 2e come in various forms, from swords and axes to bows and staves. Each weapon has its own set of statistics, including damage dice, attack bonus, and weapon traits. However, what sets magic weapons apart is their ability to have magical runes inscribed on them. Runes are magical symbols that can be added to a weapon to imbue it with additional powers.

Runes are magical symbols that can be added to a weapon to imbue it with additional powers. There are four types of runes: potency, striking, property, and resilient. Potency runes increase the weapon's attack bonus and damage dice, while striking runes grant an additional weapon damage die when the weapon's wielder critically hits.

Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder Second Edition: I hear it's bad - Why Bad, How Bad?

Why didn't you say so! We certainly don't need fancy math to tell a magic weapon is better than a non-magical shield!

Obviously we're not seeing the whole picture. I can't imagine the PF2 devs missing something as obvious as this!

That is, unless you can't "upgrade" both your arms, you will obviously switch to a different weapons combo that allows it.

In any game where weapons can be significantly upgraded, but shields can't, obviously noone will use shields (except at the lowest levels)

zztong

Explorer

Sorry? Err, um, my mistake.

I suspect the dilemma the designers faced was balancing the magic weapon bonuses against the magic armor bonuses, and then not having some offensive to-hit bonus to put against a magic shield AC bonus.

CapnZapp

Legend

Sorry? Err, um, my mistake.

I suspect the dilemma the designers faced was balancing the magic weapon bonuses against the magic armor bonuses, and then not having some offensive to-hit bonus to put against a magic shield AC bonus.

As primarily defensive implements, the obvious function of a magic shield would be to protect you from damage. If bonuses to AC isn't enough (or can't be raised enough for other reasons), the natural alternative would be to make it soak damage.

If a +3 longsword adds 9 points of damage less than a greatswordto outgoing damage, maybe a +3 shield could subtract 3 from each incoming damage and the trade-off would be acceptable?

zztong

Explorer

As primarily defensive implements, the obvious function of a magic shield would be to protect you from damage. If bonuses to AC isn't enough (or can't be raised enough for other reasons), the natural alternative would be to make it soak damage.

If a +3 longsword adds 9 points of damage less than a greatswordto outgoing damage, maybe a +3 shield could subtract 3 from each incoming damage and the trade-off would be acceptable?

I'd argue armor would be more apropos for absorbing damage and a shield for AC, but that's neither here nor there.

That is certainly an alternative, though the longsword damage in the same amount as the greatsword, so the greatsword becomes even more likely to be the weapon of choice because you mitigate a smaller percentage of its maximum. Or, in reverse, with 5 DR, you shutdown 5/8's of a longsword versus 5/12's of a greatsword.

Another approach would have been to allow shields to have a bonus, but (if the shield were raised) only give the player the larger magic bonus to AC of either the shield or armor, otherwise the armor's bonus. The +2 shield bonus would always apply if raised.

chunkosauruswrex

First Post

In PF1, a +5 two-handed weapon would do something like 1d12+5.
In PF2, a +5 two-handed weapon would do something like 5d12.

A PF2, the differences in damage based on the die-size of the weapon separate significantly as the magical bonus advances. This lets magic weapons keep up with spell damage, but it also exaggerates the differences in the weapons themselves.

So, would you take a shield and a +5 d8 one-handed weapon or a +5 d12 weapon? You average 2 points more damage per die, so +10 average damage and a much higher potential peak damage. The trade off was that you are 10% more likely to get hit, and perhaps suffer a critical hit. We were seeing folks ditch the shield, specially if they weren't trying to frequently tank.

IIRC, you could not get a magic shield. You needed a class, I think Paladin, to take feats to improve their AC bonus from a shield. That's from memory so I might have be off in some way.

According to people with the final book in their hands the max weapons go to is +3( except for some artifact level weapons)

zztong

Explorer

According to people with the final book in their hands the max weapons go to is +3( except for some artifact level weapons)

And that may have been true of the Playtest too. I don't recall how high they went. The important part is that magic weapon damage improves by the item's dice, not its bonus.

chunkosauruswrex

First Post

And that may have been true of the Playtest too. I don't recall how high they went. The important part is that magic weapon damage improves by the item's dice, not its bonus.

zztong

Explorer

Certainly. From a to-hit perspective, the magic weapon bonus is irrelevant assuming the magic armor bonus is realized at the same time. In the Playtest, the magic armor bonus was usually available 1 level earlier than the magic weapon bonus, but that's from memory.

In terms of damage, even a comparison of 2d8 damage (one-hand weapon) vs 2d12 (two-hand weapon) was enough to shift player preference at our table. That is, 24 peak damage vs 16 peak damage, or 13 average damage vs 9 average damage.

Oh, and I had a +5 at 5d12, but that would really have been 6d12. A +3 d12 weapon would do 4d12. Sorry for the accidental misinformation.

chunkosauruswrex

First Post

Certainly. From a to-hit perspective, the magic weapon bonus is irrelevant assuming the magic armor bonus is realized at the same time. In the Playtest, the magic armor bonus was usually available 1 level earlier than the magic weapon bonus, but that's from memory.

In terms of damage, even a comparison of 2d8 damage (one-hand weapon) vs 2d12 (two-hand weapon) was enough to shift player preference at our table. That is, 24 peak damage vs 16 peak damage, or 13 average damage vs 9 average damage.

Oh, and I had a +5 at 5d12, but that would really have been 6d12. A +3 d12 weapon would do 4d12. Sorry for the accidental misinformation.

The thing that is supposed to balance that out one handed vs two handed is that AC matters a lot more with critical hits being +10 AC. Meaning when monster attack bonuses get high if you are focused solely on damage at the expense of defense you become a glass cannon who won't survive many rounds of combat

zztong

Explorer

The thing that is supposed to balance that out one handed vs two handed is that AC matters a lot more with critical hits being +10 AC. Meaning when monster attack bonuses get high if you are focused solely on damage at the expense of defense you become a glass cannon who won't survive many rounds of combat

Agreed. That does seem to be the design intent. Players at our table routinely came to the conclusion outbound damage was worth more. I don't know that any of them performed any deep analysis. In one scenario there was a Paladin who made great use of their shield.

CapnZapp

Legend

I'd argue armor would be more apropos for absorbing damage and a shield for AC, but that's neither here nor there.

That is certainly an alternative, though the longsword damage in the same amount as the greatsword, so the greatsword becomes even more likely to be the weapon of choice because you mitigate a smaller percentage of its maximum. Or, in reverse, with 5 DR, you shutdown 5/8's of a longsword versus 5/12's of a greatsword.

Sorry what? Isn't a hero with a +3 shield facing critters that bite 20, 30 or 50-point chunks?

I mean, we're at the level where your Greatsword buddy sports 8d6 damage. What does five eights got to do with anything?

At this stage, my point is that
a) shields need something or they won't get used
and
b) this is not rocket science. In fact, it's bleedingly obvious

Which makes it kind of hard for me to wrap my head around the claim they had a whole year's worth of playtest and they still ended up publishing NOTHING for shields.

CapnZapp

Legend

The thing that is supposed to balance that out one handed vs two handed is that AC matters a lot more with critical hits being +10 AC. Meaning when monster attack bonuses get high if you are focused solely on damage at the expense of defense you become a glass cannon who won't survive many rounds of combat

Well you need way more than a mere +2 AC difference for that.

Alternatively, I'm having a hard time envisioning Paizo telling everybody that chose Greatsword "sorry pal but you made the glass cannon choice, you can expect to roll up many new characters. "

Maybe shield feats increase the AC bonus enough that this discussion is entirely unnecessary.

zztong

Explorer

CapnZapp

Legend

Yeah don't sweat it.

I should be able to see for myself soon enough.

Celtavian

Dragon Lord

Shields seemed decent for healer types. No one tried a sword and board martial. Using the raise a shield action seemed to pale in comparison to trying a third attack. The 5 point damage reduction isn't high enough to forego swinging for 8 or so damage. Shields do seem like a subpar option unless feats somehow make them capable of mitigating a more impressive amount of damage.

JesterOC

Explorer

Beyond the standard shields there are sturdy shields that are nonmagical but the have greater hardness and many more hit points.

Against equal creatures of about equal level (to the shield) they will be useful for many hits in combat. Though it is best to repair them afterwards.

The most powerful of these sturdy shields can handle a couple of 60hp hits in a fight.

Remathilis

Legend

So the PF2e sheet is. Busy? I might be used to the far simpler 5e sheet, but this just feels like too much info. The biggest is all the TEML grids; just make a simple "Prof" box rather than 4 tiny boxes!

CapnZapp

Legend

Interesting - so PF2 shields absorb damage, they don't merely add +2 AC like shields have done since the dawn of time.

Damage Reduction X is generally more powerful than +X damage (since 1 point of adventurer hp is generally much more valuable than 1 point of monster hp) so the specific trade-off isn't my immediate concern.

At least they didn't ask the sword and boarder to trade (3d12 - 3d8) for a measly +2 AC!

JesterOC

Explorer

Just having a shield worn does nothing.

If you use an action to "raise your shield" you gain the passive AC bonus
If you are a fighter or champion you have an ability called shield block that subtracts the shields hardness from the blow and then distributes the remaining damage to you and the shield itself.
Your shield can only handle a few solid hits like that before it is broken. A broken shield can't be used as a shield anymore but it can be repaired (easily done when the wizard is prepping spells in the morning or evening ). If the shield takes twice as much damage that it takes to be broken (really really hard hit) then it is destroyed and can't be repaired.
It is up to the fighter to decide if they want to risk loosing the shields passive bonus by letting the shield get damaged by a shield block.

Standard wooden shields are a bit weak, but good for people who can't shield block since they won't be taking damage,
Steel shields are tougher, then you can buy special shields called sturdy shields that are very expensive (min 100gp) but can take a heck of a beating.

CapnZapp

Legend

Just having a shield worn does nothing.

If you use an action to "raise your shield" you gain the passive AC bonus
If you are a fighter or champion you have an ability called shield block that subtracts the shields hardness from the blow and then distributes the remaining damage to you and the shield itself.
Your shield can only handle a few solid hits like that before it is broken. A broken shield can't be used as a shield anymore but it can be repaired (easily done when the wizard is prepping spells in the morning or evening ). If the shield takes twice as much damage that it takes to be broken (really really hard hit) then it is destroyed and can't be repaired.
It is up to the fighter to decide if they want to risk loosing the shields passive bonus by letting the shield get damaged by a shield block.

Standard wooden shields are a bit weak, but good for people who can't shield block since they won't be taking damage,
Steel shields are tougher, then you can buy special shields called sturdy shields that are very expensive (min 100gp) but can take a heck of a beating.

It seems more analysis is needed before a definite conclusion is drawn.

I can't figure out exactly how many points of damage a Fighter can expect to negate by downgrading from Greatsword to Longsword.

. and I don't know if you can expect to simply haul out a new shield each time a new combat breaks out (and the old one got ruined).

I can only say that if a high-level character does four attacks, say, the damage differential you're giving up is at least 16 points, and do you would expect a corresponding +3 shield to negate maybe half that, or 8 points from every incoming attack.

On average! (If the shield can break mid-fight, it obviously must be rated at a higher DR)

Since high-level PF2 fighters very likely can increase DPS much higher than that, this 8 DR number is likely very very low.

Maybe magic shields add twice its "plus" in added DR, or something.

If you expect the choice between shield and not shield is meant to remain an interesting one at these lofty heights, that is.

PS. Obviously magic shield can't break beyond repair like mundane shields in a game where magic swords never break, or we're back at Captain Obvious territory.

Alternatively, I'm having a hard time envisioning Paizo telling everybody that chose Greatsword "sorry pal but you made the glass cannon choice, you can expect to roll up many new characters. "

Property runes provide additional effects to the weapon, such as granting elemental damage or adding a status condition upon a successful hit. These runes can be chosen from a wide array of options, allowing players to customize their magic weapon to suit their playstyle or overcome specific challenges. Resilient runes, on the other hand, grant the weapon additional resistance or protection against certain types of damage or effects. This can be particularly useful in combat situations against enemies with specific damage types. To obtain magic weapons in Pathfinder 2e, adventurers can explore ancient ruins, defeat powerful monsters, or complete quests that reward them with these coveted artifacts. Additionally, characters with the Crafting skill can create their own magic weapons, provided they have the necessary resources and proficiency. Overall, magic weapons in Pathfinder 2e provide a means for characters to enhance their combat prowess and overcome challenges that they may not be able to handle with mundane equipment alone. They add an element of excitement and customization to the game, allowing players to personalize their characters and tackle encounters in creative and strategic ways..

Reviews for "Instruments of War: Magic Ranged Weapons in Pathfinder 2e"

1. Samantha - 2/5 - I was really excited to try out the new magic weapons in Pathfinder 2e, but I found them to be underwhelming. The variety and uniqueness of the weapons in the previous edition were completely lost in this version. It felt like all the weapons had the same basic effects, just with different names. I miss the excitement of finding a rare and powerful weapon that truly felt magical. Overall, I was disappointed with the magic weapons in Pathfinder 2e.

2. John - 3/5 - While I appreciate the effort to simplify the rules for magic weapons in Pathfinder 2e, I found the implementation to be lackluster. The new system of having specific weapon runes to upgrade the weapons felt restrictive and limited creativity. Additionally, the lack of customization options for magic weapons was a letdown. It felt like you were stuck with the same predetermined effects for each weapon, rather than being able to tailor them to your character's play style. I hope they address these issues in future updates.

3. Emily - 1/5 - The magic weapons in Pathfinder 2e left a lot to be desired. They felt like they were just tacked on as an afterthought, with no real impact on gameplay. The bonuses they provided were insignificant and did not make a noticeable difference in combat. I was expecting exciting and powerful abilities that would enhance my character's abilities, but instead, I was left feeling underwhelmed and unimpressed. I hope they revamp the magic weapons system in future editions to make them more impactful and exciting.

Blades of Glory: Legendary Swords in Pathfinder 2e