A silly question about Evasion

[Grogg of the North]

Suppose I have a rogue that is using a shield. Can this rogue still take advantage of their evasion ability?

I've checked all my books and can't find anything saying one way or the other on this scenario.

Now I've always pictured evasion as a benefit of a rogue being all nimbly bimbly and that a shield would just weigh them down and get in the way.

But I'm curious as to what the greater RPG playing community has to say on this? Am I wrong and its spelled out somewhere? Assume for this discussion that the rogue is proficient with the shield.

Thanks!

 

[Crothian]

Equipment as far as I've seen never negates evasion. Rogues are just that nimble that they can use evasion with a shield, with a lamp shade, or a while juggling fine china.

 

[Greenfield]

I think I see the point of the question.

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Rogues are proficient with all simple weapons, plus the hand crossbow, rapier, shortbow, and short sword. Rogues are proficient with light armor, but not with shields.

If the Rogue was stealing the shield there wouldn't be a question.

If he's using the shield, however... It's like a Rogue/Fighter wearing heavy armor. Does he still get his Rogue abilities if he's using gear/armor that's normally outside the Rogue's allowable list?

Older versions of the rules, and perhaps the PHB, had specific limits on these things. The current SRD doesn't.

 

[Arrowhawk]

Segueing from Green's response, I would say that if it was a light wooden shield, no issue either way.

If it's a heavy steel shield or tower shield and they are just holding it i.e. no AC improvement, then he/she gets evasion so long as the drop the shield in the process. If they have "donned" the shield and it has been improving their AC, then no evasion.

EDIT:

But unless the rules explicitly state this somewhere, I would give the PC a warning as soon as the Rogue employed the Evasion-denying shield. If this hadn't been disclosed prior to the incident requiring the Evasion roll, I would let them get one freebie and then impose the penalty.

 

[Greenfield]

Silly question: I know that classes like Ranger, Monk and Barbarian have specific injunctions against wearing certain classes of armor.

Is there anything specific in the Rogue class description that actually says he loses class features/abilities if he somehow ends up in plate mail or with heavy shields?

 

[Grogg of the North]

The PHB and the SRD both state that the rogue only gains the benefit of evasion if they are wearing light or no armor. Nothing about shields in the description. Hence my question.

If they were carrying, to use as a plate or a sled or whatever, I'd have no problem. If they were using it for protection ... well I'm leaning to no. Mostly because the "image" of a rogue is light and agile. Not carrying around a bunch of armor.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Of course they can. Evasion says nothing in regards to shields, so why would it prevent the use? Hell, if anything it seems like a shield would help you evade a blast...

Also, Rangers are proficient with shields and get Evasion, too. Lets see what their Evasion ability says...

"Evasion (Ex)
At 9th level, a ranger can avoid even magical and unusual attacks with great agility. If he makes a successful Reflex saving throw against an attack that normally deals half damage on a successful save, he instead takes no damage. Evasion can be used only if the ranger is wearing light armor or no armor. A helpless ranger does not gain the benefit of evasion."

Oh look, the exact same thing.

Let's look at Monk...

"Evasion (Ex)
At 2nd level or higher if a monk makes a successful Reflex saving throw against an attack that normally deals half damage on a successful save, she instead takes no damage. Evasion can be used only if a monk is wearing light armor or no armor. A helpless monk does not gain the benefit of evasion."

Oh look, the exact same thing. And monks aren't even proficient with light armor!

 

[Particle_Man]

Besides, a rogue is only a feat or multi-class away from gaining proficiency with shields, were that the issue (but it isn't, as earlier posters have noted).

 

[Arrowhawk]

Of course they can. Evasion says nothing in regards to shields, so why would it prevent the use?

Because the restriction on Evasion and medium or heavy armor is there because of exactly what Grogg suspects: the ability to dodge out of the way. I would also include the restriction if the Ranger/Rogue, etc were carrying a "heavy" load and could not drop it. The restriction on medium/heavy armor isn't arbitrary. It's purpose coincides with the concept of being able to move without restriction or at worst minimal restriction.

Grogg's question is a good one because the rule restriction on Evasion is based on a condition and RAI says that anything that would restrict movement like medium/heavy armor should also restrict Evasion.

Whether any particular shield crosses the line is a DM's call. I'd vote no on light, yes on heavy.

 

[RogueInRouge]

The ability description for Evasion is pretty specific in its exclusions:

Evasion can only be used if the rogue is wearing light armor or no armor.

So if the rogue has taken the shield proficiency feat, I don't see any problem at all with evasion. And even if the rogue hasn't taken shield proficiency, then he suffers the normal penalties for using the shield, i.e.

you take the shield’s armor check penalty on attack rolls and on all skill checks that involve moving

I don't think a reflex saving throw counts as a skill check involving movement, so again, evasion is unaffected.

Is there anything specific in the Rogue class description that actually says he loses class features/abilities if he somehow ends up in plate mail or with heavy shields?

As already mentioned the rogue can't use evasion if she's in heavy armor. Trapfinding, Uncanny Dodge, Crippling Strike, Defensive Roll, etc. are not affected by armor or encumbrance according to 3.5e PHB.