D&D 5E Dual wielding and improvised weapons. Technically broken?

[Sezarious]

Why do you say that? If you are using it as an improvised weapon then you are not wielding it as a shield, so you don't get the +2 AC.

The words "then you are not using it as a shield" are an assumption, therefore to rule as such, you would effectively be houseruling. In fact following the wording strictly for shields on 147 PHB "-WIELDING a shield increases your armor class by 2". As established, shields CAN be used as improvised weapons and can be a dual wielded weapon if it's wielder has the dual wielding feat. More importantly, any object you hold is CLASSED as an improvised weapon, does attacking with your shield stop you from wielding it? No, and according to the rules, it doesn't matter HOW you are wielding it, if you are wielding it, you get the AC bonus.

I'm not saying that the game designers wanted this to be allowed, I'm saying that strictly following the rules for improvised weapons to the letter means that a shield is classified as a weapon. If the shield is classed as a type of weapon, the dual wielding feat can apply to it, the same as if a player was holding a crowbar and a bin lid (though the bin lid would not be used as a shield unless the DM house ruled it).

 

[Sezarious]

Why do you say that? If you are using it as an improvised weapon then you are not wielding it as a shield, so you don't get the +2 AC.

Also, just to add, if you wanted to houserule that you lose the+2 bonus because 'it's not a shield, it's a weapon for this turn' then acknowledging this would surely mean it should be treated as a weapon for all purposes of dual wielding right? Therefore you would lose the +2 shield bonus but GAIN the +1 dual wielding defence bonus.

But as PnPgamer posted in post #2, an official has confirmed you DON'T lose your shield AC if you shield bash. A shield is an improvised weapon. It becomes an active second weapon with the dual wielding feat, therefore it provides both bonuses. It's all supported in the rules.

 

[baradtgnome]

....there is nothing that specifies a weapon cannot be an improvised weapon for the purpose of gaining the +1 bonus to AC..... Thoughts?

Welcome to the boards. I would support most of your proposal. However, at my table I would rule the additional AC bonus does not add to the AC already provided by the shield. I think the intent of the feat is to provide 'some' AC improvement when dual wielder - say half as good as a shield. Therefore, I do not see this as making the shield 50% better.

 

[Sezarious]

Welcome to the boards. I would support most of your proposal. However, at my table I would rule the additional AC bonus does not add to the AC already provided by the shield. I think the intent of the feat is to provide 'some' AC improvement when dual wielder - say half as good as a shield. Therefore, I do not see this as making the shield 50% better.

I agree with you that I don't think this was the intent of the feat and I think most DM's would also rule at least what you have, but I still believe from a purely rules perspective that the loophole is there. Having said that as a DM as well a a player myself, I would find it to be irritating if a player was trying to min-max in such a way.

I guess I'm surprised that they classified improvised weapons so broadly, but then, they had to for those who enjoy improvised weapon fighting. The fact that a shield needs only to be CLASSED as both weapon and shield to gain the benefits of both according to the core rules is most definitely broken.

 

[baradtgnome]

Well, since it is not, nothing is really broken. Worry less, play more.

The philosophy of 5E says do not worry about these corner cases so much. I am on board with that.

 

[S_Dalsgaard]

By that logic, if one were using the dual wielder feat with two actual weapons, would you say that the +1 to AC gained from using two weapons didn't apply to any round in which the off hand weapon was used to attack? That would make that feat benefit kind of worthless, turning the off hand weapon into just a poor shield.

No, I would allow the +1 to AC as per the feat.

IMO when using a shield as an improvised weapon, you are using it for something it wasn't really intended for and it shouldn't function as a shield simultaneously. When getting the AC benefit of a second weapon with the Dual Wielder feat, you are trained in using your secondary weapon for both offense and defense simultaneously. I would probably allow someone with the feat to get +1 to AC when using a shield as an improvised weapon, but not the full +2 of the shield.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I'd let the shield grant its +2 AC bonus, but I wouldn't allow the +1 AC from Dual Wielder to stack on top of that (I agree that the RAW allows them to stack, but I don't think that's RAI).

For one feat (Dual Wielder) you get a terrible weapon (no proficiency bonus, 1d4 damage) and an additional +1 AC over what you'd normally get from Dual Wielder. Doesn't seem unreasonable for a feat, although I'd rather just have a decent weapon in my off-hand.

For two feats (Dual Wielder and Tavern Brawler) you have a sub-par weapon (1d4 damage) and the additional +1 AC. Doesn't seem overpowered for two feats. Although, if it were me, I'd just use something other than a shield in my off-hand and take a better feat in lieu of Tavern Brawler.

Frankly, if you want to use a shield, I'd say you'd be better off taking Shield Master instead of Dual Wielder. You won't get any extra damage out of it, but it's otherwise an arguably better feat for a shield user.

 

[SkidAce]

Doesn't attacking with the shield negates the shield's AC bonus for the round?

Warder

The shield is still there blocking a portion of your body...so I would let the AC bonus stay.

Less fiddly also.

 

[SkidAce]

I'd let the shield grant its +2 AC bonus, but I wouldn't allow the +1 AC from Dual Wielder to stack on top of that (I agree that the RAW allows them to stack, but I don't think that's RAI).

Me too.

 

[Sunseeker]

I would allow all AC to stack as a nod to the amount of damage the player is giving up in order to do this. You're doing 1d4+mod damage, which means you're going to be looking at maybe 6 damage per hit in exchange for being quite possibly the most unhittable thing on the battlefield (at low levels at least). I'm also imagining the player using one of these shields Captain America style. Combine this with Eldritch Knight with a weapon bond with your shields so that you could have them immediately return to you after throwing. It eats your bonus action, but bypasses the donning/doffing time, and makes for epic visuals.