D&D 5E Can I attack with a two-handed weapon while wearing, but not wielding a shield?

Kor · Nov 13, 2015

In past editions, a character could wear a buckler, and then choose whether they wish to attack two-handed and negate the shield bonus, or to attack one-handed and gain the shield bonus. 5th edition only has 1 classification of shields, but I was wonder if their are any rules that pertain to this.

Do I have to drop my wielded shield to attack two-handed, or can I just "release" the shield, negating its +2 AC protection, and rely on a strap to hold it onto my arm?

pukunui · Nov 13, 2015

There are no rules on it. You'd have to ask your DM for a ruling (or make one up, if you are the DM). I'd be inclined to say no, but it would depend on the circumstances. At face value, it sounds like you're trying to get around the game's action economy (since it takes an action to don or doff a shield).

TheCosmicKid · Nov 13, 2015

The buckler rule never made sense, since even a buckler is handheld. For a full-sized shield? Even if you do have it strapped on somehow such that your hand projects beyond the rim (which means your hand is unprotected by it, so already a bad idea), you're not gonna be executing any two-handed sword maneuvers with that bulk on your arm. Shields are big. That's what makes them so useful.

aramis erak · Nov 14, 2015

Kor said:
In past editions, a character could wear a buckler, and then choose whether they wish to attack two-handed and negate the shield bonus, or to attack one-handed and gain the shield bonus. 5th edition only has 1 classification of shields, but I was wonder if their are any rules that pertain to this.

Do I have to drop my wielded shield to attack two-handed, or can I just "release" the shield, negating its +2 AC protection, and rely on a strap to hold it onto my arm?

I'd allow you to sling it, but (with a few historical exceptions) shields generally require a hand on the handgrip to not get in your way. So, unless you'd specially bough one that straps only to the forearm, I'd impose a penalty on the strike, as you're banging yourself using a 2h weapon.

There were belted-on bucklers - for stability, they had to extend past the elbow to be of use.
I've personally used a buckler-sized targe with a dagger in the same hand while fencing in the SCA. It was impractical in SCA fence, because you're not allowed to strike your opponent with the buckler (for safety reasons), but in a real fight, hell yeah, Dirk and Targe in one hand, 1-h claidhmor in the other.

TheCosmicKid said:
The buckler rule never made sense, since even a buckler is handheld. For a full-sized shield? Even if you do have it strapped on somehow such that your hand projects beyond the rim (which means your hand is unprotected by it, so already a bad idea), you're not gonna be executing any two-handed sword maneuvers with that bulk on your arm. Shields are big. That's what makes them so useful.

The idea that all bucklers are center rigid grip is patently false.

Some were center rigid handle. These tend to be the most common surviving ones.
Some were center strap handle (usually, these have a pad of sheep-hide). A friend showed me a period mention of leather bucklers with a strap; so I made and used one. They are great. You can manage them and hold a dagger if they're small enough.
Some were near-edge handle and opposed edge strap - the edge extends just past the knuckles of the fist. You can punch, drink from a horn or tankard, and such, but not hold a blade comfortably.
Some were two straps. I've made a couple of these, one a targe (leather and studs over wood), the other simply a two strap leather buckler. You can easily use a dagger with it.
A few (specifically ancient period assyrian) were affixed to a vambrace.These were used by archers to parry long enough to draw a sword

S'mon · Nov 15, 2015

AIR the 3e rule was that the buckler gave +1 AC while wielded, but when attacking with 2 handed weapon the attacker was -1 to hit and no AC bonus from the buckler that round. That seems reasonable to me.

You could do the same with 2 weapon fighting in 5e: buckler gives +1 AC when wielded, can attack with off-hand weapon but then no AC bonus from buckler until your next turn and -1 to hit with off-hand attack.

It probably would not be overpowered to let d4 off-hand attacks be at no penalty (either a buckler spike or a dagger in that hand) in return for giving up the +1 AC bonus.

Ralif Redhammer · Nov 16, 2015

I'd agree with pukunui on not allowing the quick dropping of a shield to use a two-handed weapon. Considering a round is six seconds, that's not a lot of time to get the shield out of the way, reconfigure your grip, possibly move, worry about what your enemy is doing, and still try to strike.

pukunui · Nov 16, 2015

Ralif Redhammer said:
I'd agree with pukunui on not allowing the quick dropping of a shield to use a two-handed weapon. Considering a round is six seconds, that's not a lot of time to get the shield out of the way, reconfigure your grip, possibly move, worry about what your enemy is doing, and still try to strike.

I think I'd allow it with a feat - like say a modified version of the Shield Master feat, maybe substituting one of the existing bennies for the ability to swap your AC bonus from the shield for a round in order to attack with a two-handed weapon. But I don't think I'd allow it by default. Just seems too munchkiny to me, even if there is real world precedent for it.

Z. H. Darkstar · Nov 17, 2015

According to the Don/Doff table, it takes an action to remove your shield.

pukunui · Nov 17, 2015

Z. H. Darkstar said:
According to the Don/Doff table, it takes an action to remove your shield.

Yes, but the OP is asking if he can keep the shield donned but just trade the AC bonus for the ability to wield a two-handed weapon.

Paraxis · Nov 17, 2015

If you don't take an action to doff the shield you can't use that hand to hold something else, once you do it takes an action to don the shield again before you can gain the AC bonus from it.