Shields

[jdsivyer]

Okay, there's one thing that's always niggled me about D&D in any shape or form, and that is shields. In true combat (real life stuff ), shields are a very effective form of protection. However, in 3.5 I don't think they still fully address the problem.

The Buckler and Light Shields give AC +1 and -1 penalty. The buckler costs 15gp, and the other 2 light shields 3gp and 9gp. The 2 heavy shields give +2 to AC and -2 penalty, and cost 20gp and 7gp. Now, I know the steel ones cost more because they have a better chance of surviving a SAVE against fireballs, etc. Then there is the Tower Shield: +4 and -10. Now, I don't know about your campaigns, but these stats don't give a lot of incentive for PCs to purchase shields. Some do, I know, but I also know people would sometimes rather get a two-handed weapon in their grips then receive an Armour Check penalty for the sake of a shield.

Personally, I think it could be something simple like this:

Light Wooden shields cost 5gp (+2 AC; -1 penalty)
Light Steel shields cost 10 (+2 AC; -1 penalty)
Heavy Wooden shields cost 15 (+4 AC; -2 penalty)
Heavy Steel shields cost 30 (+4 AC; -2 penalty)

(For every 2 points of AC bonus the wielder has -1 AC penalty check...this could be used as a guideline when creating/introducing other shields.)

A Tower Shield is a specifc type of shield and is a flat 90gp for a wooden version, and a flat 150gp for a steel version. The AC bonus is +8 (have you ever seen these things!? ) and an armour check penalty of -4.

Of course, there are feats that can offset Armour Check Penalties, and that's fine. I think the incentive should be for the PCs to get a shield - or, at least some of them. How many pics do we see of fighters etc with shields in the D&D books but rarely do we (in my experience) have PCs who purchase/use them?

Now...all of this is just off the top of my head, so feel free to rip it apart, make suggestions, etc

 

[ChampionoftheTriad]

jdsivyer,

I couldn't agree more! In fact the stats you put forth for shields is exactly what I've done.
In combination with the various shield feats introduced in CW and especially PH2, it makes shields a worthy and viable option.

One might be tempted to look at the math of two-handed vs one+shield and say "too good". Well I can tell you from experience that when they use two handers, they use Power Attack, and with the doubling of the Power Attack bonus, it can get ridiculous.

I have a few old PCs who have ALWAYS used a shield and, by RAW, they SUCK! So, I like these changes.

 

[Sylrae]

This is definitely interesting. I dont know how it would play out, it might make shields too good, but from first glance seems like an improvement, and could be useful. Have you tested it? does this mod make shields far better than the 2-weapon, or 2-handed options? they should all be equally viable really.

 

[jdsivyer]

This is definitely interesting. I dont know how it would play out, it might make shields too good, but from first glance seems like an improvement, and could be useful. Have you tested it? does this mod make shields far better than the 2-weapon, or 2-handed options? they should all be equally viable really.

So far it seems to be going okay in our group. The people who before wanted to have a shield but didn't like the rules in the PHB use them now. We haven't noticed any unbalancing...so far

I wouldn't say they're far better than the -2 weapons or 2-handed options, as both seem to be kind of equally important. It does give an extra option, though

 

[Kerrick]

You bring up a good point - there's little to no reason to buy a buckler over a light shield, especially since the light shield costs LESS. I've always wondered at the goofiness of that one, but I never considered boosting the AC bonuses.

Why only -4 for tower shield, though? I know you want the penalty to be half the AC bonus, but those things are seriously unwieldy - they apply a -2 to attack rolls. I'm not sure, but I think +8 could be a bit too much, too - every fighter would want one. Don't forget, you can already use it as total cover, which grants the +8 AC bonus.

Personally, I'd go with +2 for light shields, +3 for heavy, and +4 for tower shield.

 

[jdsivyer]

You bring up a good point - there's little to no reason to buy a buckler over a light shield, especially since the light shield costs LESS. I've always wondered at the goofiness of that one, but I never considered boosting the AC bonuses.

Why only -4 for tower shield, though? I know you want the penalty to be half the AC bonus, but those things are seriously unwieldy - they apply a -2 to attack rolls. I'm not sure, but I think +8 could be a bit too much, too - every fighter would want one. Don't forget, you can already use it as total cover, which grants the +8 AC bonus.

Personally, I'd go with +2 for light shields, +3 for heavy, and +4 for tower shield.

Yeah, fair point

But due to the heavy armour check penalty I might make the Tower Shield +5 to AC, just to set it apart from the rest.

Food for thought

 

[ChampionoftheTriad]

I suppose those are reasonable numbers, if for no other reason than you don't want to invalidate the light shield. I always just reflexivly doubled the pathetic bonuses in RAW.

And, the reason to use a buckler is that you can not only hold something in your off hand...you can WIELD something in your off hand, and you can use a bow or crossbow without penalty.

 

[Hawken]

Here's an idea that just came to mind on bucklers and shields:

The defender adds 1/2 their BAB to their Shield's AC bonus to a number of attacks per round but suffer the same -2 penalty to hit with their attacks as if they were fighting with two weapons. The number of attacks could depend on either the size of the shield:
Buckler = 1 attack
Light Shield = 2 attacks
Heavy Shield = 4 attacks
Tower Shield = All attacks

Or it could depend on the BAB of the defender:
BAB 5 or less = 1 attack
BAB 6 - 10 = 2 attacks
BAB 11-15 = 3 attacks
BAB 16+ = 4 attacks

If the defender was subject to more attacks than the amount listed, he gains only his Shield's bonus to AC. The reason for the extra bonus to AC depending on BAB is that instead of trying to strike his enemy with a weapon (like with 2 weapon fighting), he's attempting to better place his shield between his attacker's weapon and himself.

The defender could take a feat to offset the penalty to attack and improve the protection against attacks.

Weapon and Shield Fighting
Prerequisite: Proficient with weapon and shield used.
Benefit: This feat eliminates the -2 penalty to attack when using a shield as above and also increases the number of attacks per round your shield defends against by 1.

 

[Kerrick]

But due to the heavy armour check penalty I might make the Tower Shield +5 to AC, just to set it apart from the rest.

Yeah, that's good.

The defender adds 1/2 their BAB to their Shield's AC bonus to a number of attacks per round but suffer the same -2 penalty to hit with their attacks as if they were fighting with two weapons.

That harkens back to the 1E/2E version, where shields only applied against attackers in certain positions (which, thankfully, was dropped because it made combat too complicated). I like it, though - this makes shields more useful. I'd go with the first version, I think; a buckler can't defend against a huge number of attacks, no matter how skilled its wielder is. The feat's a good addition, too - fighters need more of them.

 

[Hawken]

Yeah, I know its similar to earlier editions, however, I wanted the number of attacks it could defend against at the BAB-infused bonus (and all other attacks get the lower, "normal" shield bonus) to be dependent either on the size of the shield (representing its weight and size) or the character's skill in combat (BAB), not from which direction the attacks were coming. Since its been established that characters can easily change facing, its reasonable also they can move their arm to put that shield between themselves and an attack.