Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9392876" data-attributes="member: 7030563">The entire fantasy genre as well  as the AC hit point and damage system is against how sword fights went down (and go down) in history.  If we want historical realism on using weaponry a high magic fantasy game is not what you shoudl be playing and even if we take all magic out of it the basic weapon and AC combat system is not anything close to historically (or physically) accurate.Further there may be some small subset of people who want historical sword fights, but that is an extremely small number, D&D is not now and never has been a good system for that and this small number, if it exists is widely countered by people who want a high magic unreal version of combat. When I DM I usually make it a point to attack spell casters.  I don't walk past the warrior because he is casting shield and has a high AC, I walk past him and take AOOs to do that regardless of what his AC  is, because the casters are more dangerous.I do this as a player too.  If I am playing a martial melee PC I will teleport, or just run by the bad guy front liners and martials to attack the enemy casters.   The only time I won't do this is when my allies put down an AOE (and sometimes if I go before them their options are limited because of this).Why wouldn't you play intelligence enemies and PCs this way? Unless there is a chokepoint a warrior should not be able to keep monsters away from the casters and why would the monsters want to let him?  But it is not invincible, usuing Shield stops  the Warrior from making AOOs, and as a defense it does nothing against shove, grapple, any save abilities or spells or most improvised actions.  It hinders attacks, just like the fly spell, blink, charm and a host of other abilities that are in many ways and circumstances more effective at protecting from melee attacks. IMO the real problem is not the warrior with the 27 AC, it is the lazy DM that just wants to hit him with a stick over and over and whether the warrior's AC is 7 or 27 those kind of tactics lead to boring combat IMO.'They should be eating the Wizard in the back whether the Warrior has shield or not, but regardless if you are asking how to deal with a  player with shield, this is the way.Ok, so in 5E the spell was crreated for any PC with one level in Wizard, Sorcerer, or Hexblade, 3 levels in Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster or anyone who takes in the magic initiate feat.Everyone who have seen use shield to date falls inside that list of people who it was intended for any many of them have something else like armor to go along with it.Shield does exactly what it was intended to do in combat.</blockquote>

Verification