D&D (2024) Should shields, like Simple weapons be available to all characters?

[Kalmi]

Part of the issue with shields is using them has nuances D&D isn't set up well to deal with. Virtually every character would realistically get a massive bonus vs. ranged attacks when using a shield, regardless of proficiency. It's not too hard to understand the concept of holding up a big object between you and a predictably-fired weapon. Using one in melee combat is an entirely different thing.

There's also the counter-intuitive reality that the benefits of shields are bigger the less armor you have, which again is not how D&D works. Worlds Without Number is kind of interesting here, where shields provide a base AC like armor does, but if your armor exceeds that number the shields give you a +1 bonus instead.

 

[Horwath]

There's also the counter-intuitive reality that the benefits of shields are bigger the less armor you have, which again is not how D&D works. Worlds Without Number is kind of interesting here, where shields provide a base AC like armor does, but if your armor exceeds that number the shields give you a +1 bonus instead.

you can simplify it if you want that variant:

+4 AC without armor
+3 AC with light armor
+2 AC medium armor
+1 AC heavy armor

works best if dex is limited to +4

 

[Shardstone]

I think all characters should be prof in all weapons, including shields. Gandalf was a beast with a blade.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I think all characters should be prof in all weapons, including shields. Gandalf was a beast with a blade.

so what are we compensating the classes who already have martial weapon proficiency with then?

 

[Horwath]

so what are we compensating the classes who already have martial weapon proficiency with then?

nothing.

without investment in DEX/STR, feats, extra attacks, class features that support weapon combat, styles, attack riders, that +1 average damage means next to nothing.

it just means that we need two weapon lists instead of one.

 

[Shardstone]

so what are we compensating the classes who already have martial weapon proficiency with then?

Weapon Arts, ala Elden Ring, and really just more fun ways to use weapons. Masteries IMO really should only be the tip of the iceberg. There are roughly 100 different weapon arts in Elden Ring; many of them are non-magical or require matial skill to pull off due to stat requirements.

Everyone should be able to use a sword effectively. Only martials should be able to do crazy stunts with a sword, or have skill that borderlines the supernatural.

 

[James Gasik]

nothing.

without investment in DEX/STR, feats, extra attacks, class features that support weapon combat, styles, attack riders, that +1 average damage means next to nothing.

it just means that we need two weapon lists instead of one.

Or if you gave every character Weapon Masteries instead of making it a class ability- if you don't have the Strength or Dexterity to use the weapon or it's Mastery properly, it makes no real difference if you have it or not.

Let's say, for example your DM rolls dice for ability scores, and you end up with a Fighter with a Dex of 9. Sure he's proficient with all ranged weapons. It's not going to do him a whole lot of good.

If Wizards could use Martial weapons, they might get some short term benefit in Tier 1 out of a Heavy Crossbow doing d10+2 or +3 instead of a Firebolt doing 1d10 (if they don't mind carrying around the crossbow, the ammo, and still using the Firebolt against enemies resistant to nonmagical weapons), but by level 5, when that Firebolt does 2d10 and likely has a better hit chance, that crossbow might as well be kindling.

 

[CreamCloud0]

nothing.

without investment in DEX/STR, feats, extra attacks, class features that support weapon combat, styles, attack riders, that +1 average damage means next to nothing.

it just means that we need two weapon lists instead of one.

i really can't say i agree, if i had my way more classes would be getting LESS weapon proficiencies than they currently get not more,

 

[Horwath]

i really can't say i agree, if i had my way more classes would be getting LESS weapon proficiencies than they currently get not more,

why?

what does a wizard with greatsword takes away from fighter?

Even if it spares 12 STR, it's still bad compared to fighter.
And if wizard takes 16+ in STR then INT, CON and DEX will suffer so again it's a net loss for the wizard.

 

[Yaarel]

Something like:


COMBAT TRAINING
Background Feat

You grow up learning to fight alongside the adults who defend your community. You are a young member of a combat group, such as the warriors of your family clan, the army reserves of your town, the students of a military academy, or the enthusiasts of a combat sports organization.

Choose three of the following benefits:

• Proficiency with all Simple Weapons
• Proficiency with one Martial Weapon, or all Martial Weapons if you choose this option thrice
• Unarmed Strike deals 1d4 damage, or 1d6 if you choose this option twice
• Use of any proficient weapon as your spellcasting focus

The following count as two choices:

• Training with Shields
• Training with Light Armor
• One cantrip that deals damage

Repeatable. You can take this feat more than once.



Note. Four choices is fine, but three choices is on the safe side.