D&D 5E Shield Saltiness

[Flamestrike]

This is kinda mythology.

"An entire suit of field armor (that is, armor for battle) usually weighs between 45 and 55 lbs. (20 to 25 kg), with the helmet weighing between 4 and 8 lbs. (2 to 4 kg)—less than the full equipment of a fireman with oxygen gear, or what most modern soldiers have carried into battle since the nineteenth century. Moreover, while most modern equipment is chiefly suspended from the shoulders or waist, the weight of a well-fitted armor is distributed all over the body. "

It's also padded for comfort. It's really not that bad.

It really is that bad when you're wearing it for prolonged periods of time.

As someone who has worn armour as part of my job, I can assure you that even in Afghanistan (and it doesn't get much more dangerous than that) you aren't walking around the rear echelon in your plate carrier and helmet.

It's totally different at a FOB or once you cross the wire of course.

Historically soldiers (from Spartans to Viking to Knights to Samurai to SF Operators) don't walk around the place wearing heavy armour unless they're about to go into battle. It's heavy, it's hot, and those 20kgs starts feeling a lot like 100kgs after a few hours.

It just doesn't happen.

Put a 20kg backpack on your back. Walk around with that on your back for a few hours. Let me know how you get on. Then let me know how you feel at the end of the day with it on your back all day long.

And it's not just physically uncomfortable; it's also socially unacceptable. In much the same way if I wore my plate carrier and helmet to my local Shopping centre to buy some groceries.

 

[tetrasodium]

. . . What do you mean? A shield is an action, a weapon is a free action.

you mentioned a feat in the post I meant to quote but none jumped out at me so I was wondering which feat

 

[Helldritch]

The only way to carry a great axe is in your hand resting it on your shoulder. That alone, should be a concern for the town's guards to confiscate the weapon. The shield in hand should not be a problem as long as the character is going to an inn to rent a room and let the shield and armor at the room. The guards might even follow the group to make sure that they are going straight for the inn. When the group have proven that they can be trusted to do the right thing, tje guards would simply let them pass with a warm welcome.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

you mentioned a feat in the post I meant to quote but none jumped out at me so I was wondering which feat

Oh, never mind. I thought that it was published, but apparently it was dropped from the final release. It was in the 2020 Feats UA and was called Shield Training. I'll go fix my previous post.

 

[Flamestrike]

The only way to carry a great axe is in your hand resting it on your shoulder. That alone, should be a concern for the town's guards to confiscate the weapon. The shield in hand should not be a problem as long as the character is going to an inn to rent a room and let the shield and armor at the room. The guards might even follow the group to make sure that they are going straight for the inn. When the group have proven that they can be trusted to do the right thing, tje guards would simply let them pass with a warm welcome.

Depends on what constitutes a 'great axe'. If we're talking a large battle axe like a Dane axe or similar.

Generally held in hand, but it could very well have a sling to be slung over the back to free up both hands (and a warrior would have some method of stowing it to free up the hands).

Something like this:

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I think the "action to equip a shield" rule is the single most ignored or completely forgotten rule in 5e for something so basic. Dropping the rule and works just fine. You just have to conceptualize it as a held shield rather than a strapped to the arm shield. If this bothers you as too permissive just keep in mind that you can still enforce the "one free object interaction" rule which means it is still a two round project to get both sword and board in hand.

I think it is totally legitimate to roleplay townsfolk taking it as a threat when you walk around town decked out for battle all the time. But this should then to all the battlefield weapons you all probably have (basically everything other than one handed blades, staves, and maybe the occasional handaxe or cudgel is not something someone would normally walk around with if they weren't contemplating starting some naughty word). If it only applies to the shield then it really seems like you just have a DM working to catch a player with a lowered AC.

 

[Helldritch]

Depends on what constitutes a 'great axe'. If we're talking a large battle axe like a Dane axe or similar.

Generally held in hand, but it could very well have a sling to be slung over the back to free up both hands (and a warrior would have some method of stowing it to free up the hands).

Something like this:

View attachment 129855

Agreed but the great axe has a 6+ foot long aft and often has a large double bladed head. A bit impractical for the strap. But a battle axe as in the picture would fit nicely.

And it is a fine idea for the dwarf in one of my groups. Thanks a lot for the picture. Never thought of that.

 

[Flamestrike]

Agreed but the great axe has a 6+ foot long haft and often has a large double bladed head.

I dont agree with this at all. At that point, you're not wielding a 2 handed axe, you're wielding a Halberd or similar Pole arm.

For mine 'Great axe' is a largish axe that requires two hands to use effectively; something like a Dane Axe (which had hafts around 1.5 meters or 5' in length).

A Hand axe for mine is a tomahawk, Viking axe or hatchet in size (max 3' haft). A Great axe is up to 6' in length (think a fire axe or Dane axe). When the haft of the weapon is over 6 foot long, you're firmly in Pole arm territory (Halberd or Pole Axe).

 

[Helldritch]

During a medieval fair I have seen a great axe. The total length was about 7 feet (far from the pole axe and the haleberd) and it was relatively heavy. Less than the maul but it was still swingable by a strong tall man. I swung it a few times and boy was it tiresome. But my friend (6'4", 280 lbs, not that much fat...) was almost swinging it one handed. He almost bought it, but a 1200$ though the head was highly decorated, it was still a bit over priced. I wish I had a picture of it.

 

[Flamestrike]

During a medieval fair I have seen a great axe. The total length was about 7 feet (far from the pole axe and the haleberd) and it was relatively heavy. Less than the maul but it was still swingable by a strong tall man. I swung it a few times and boy was it tiresome. But my friend (6'4", 280 lbs, not that much fat...) was almost swinging it one handed. He almost bought it, but a 1200$ though the head was highly decorated, it was still a bit over priced. I wish I had a picture of it.

That's not a great axe; that's a Pollaxe. It's a polearm:

The pollaxe design arose from the need to breach the plate armour of men at arms during the 14th and 15th centuries. Generally, the form consisted of a wooden haft some 1.2–2.0 m (4–6.5 ft) long, mounted with a steel head. It seems most schools of combat suggested a haft length comparable to the height of the wielder, but in some cases hafts appear to have been created up to 2.4 m (8 ft) in length.

Haft lengths up to 8' long. And considered to be polearms:

Pollaxe - Wikipedia.

Here is a modern example:

185 cms in length (so around 6' long) so they're basically halberds.

200549 Cold Steel Pole Axe 89Pa: Amazon.com.au: Sports, Fitness & Outdoors

That's a very different weapon from a Dane Axe:

These have a haft length of 125cms (or around 4')

Deepeeka Trollbane Axe - Dane Axe - Forged - Medieval - Viking - Blunt - VGC | eBay

I wouldnt have much of an issue of a PC fluffing his 'great axe' to be either of those two things, but really once a weapon is over 6' long, you're firmly into Pole arm territory, and at 8' or longer, it's definitely a Halberd and not a Great axe.