Stalwart Defender Shield Requirement

[Xandrel]

Just to judge the "informed" nature of people opinions . . . do you even know what stalwart stance does?

I don't feed trolls, I slay them.

To me it makes sense that a shield would be needed to use the Stance.

I also think this should apply to Paladin DoS, in order to use their Stance.

Does this mean I am right or wrong, it just means I have a different view on those stances. To me they way they are implemented in some builds is more like 'exploiting the PrE', circumventing the design concept behind it's conception.

That is just my opinion.

[Ape_Man]

I don't feed trolls, I slay them.

To me it makes sense that a shield would be needed to use the Stance.

I also think this should apply to Paladin DoS, in order to use their Stance.

Does this mean I am right or wrong, it just means I have a different view on those stances. To me they way they are implemented in some builds is more like 'exploiting the PrE', circumventing the design concept behind it's conception.

That is just my opinion.

And you can't answer the question because you don't actually know what it does.

[Uska]

The Stalwart stuff? No. The cleric stuff? Yes, it is "NGE" bad.

Nah to be as bad as NGE they would have to remove all classes but cleric and give us everything automaticly with no choice.

its CU bad but nothing will ever equal NGE(No Good for Everyone) I would have played even CU SWG forever

[Stanley_Nicholas]

It makes sense that the stance would grant benefits for using a shield. It does not make sense that a shield is required for any benefit at all. A shield is not required to fight defensively.

And besides that, it makes the appeal of this tree too narrow.

[SealedInSong]

It makes sense that the stance would grant benefits for using a shield. It does not make sense that a shield is required for any benefit at all. A shield is not required to fight defensively.

And besides that, it makes the appeal of this tree too narrow.

To those that think that shields are required for fighting defensively, have you ever considered:

Combat Expertise (req: 13 int)
Defensive Fighting (granted to all characters)
Earth Stance
Dodge
Armor
Wisdom bonus to armor when centered
Unyielding Sentinel stances

Do those defensive abilities require a shield? Nope.

Should they require a shield? Nope.

Whom does requiring a shield for stalwart stance benefit? Only shield-users, and then every other person thinking to roll a creative build gets shafted.

What should using a shield do? Give you a shield bonus to armor class! Active blocking! Shield-only effects! Unique named shields! And on live, it gives you extra threat to compensate for not using TWF (better DPS), or THF (generally considered the best DPS with the current destinies).

[Ape_Man]

To those that think that shields are required for fighting defensively, have you ever considered:
.

Stop right there . . . they didn't consider anything because that would require thinking.

[SerPounce]

In addition to the shield only issue (and I agree with the consensus, the live system is fine), if the wiki is right and I'm reading it right (I can't seem to get on lama this time around) it appears the PRR bonus from defensive stance has been nerfed. On live it's 20 for being in stance + 20 for holding a shield (40 total), now on lama it's 25 total, that's a 15 point hit even if you're using a shield.

Or am I missing something here, it seems odd no one else has complained about this...