Better shields?

[BiggusGeekus]

I've been thinking about making shields a little more effective in my games. Giving them a +1 or +2 bonus depending on their size.

Anyone else do this? Did anything go wacky wrong or did people just ease up on dual-weilding?

 

[DrSpunj]

Me too

I'm thinking of doing the same thing for a campaign I'm going to start next month. I decided that all shields were actually a form of Cover. A large shield provides half cover (+4 AC, +2 to Reflex saves), a small shield provides one-quarter cover (+2 AC, +1 Reflex) and I made Bucklers be "1/8"th cover (+1 AC, +0 reflex). These bonuses are Cover bonuses and therefore won't stack with Shield or other Cover bonuses.

I haven't implemented this yet, and I'm actually going to let my group vote on whether they want to use it or not. I did this because I'm bothered by the fact that Shield bonuses only stack with mundane Armor bonuses (enhanced or otherwise) but not with Mage Armor or other similar things (Inertial Armor, etc.). Since you aren't Invulnerable if you have Mage Armor up, and someone can still hit you, shouldn't your shield still provide some defense once they get through your Mage Armor? And if you feel Mage Armor surrounds you and not your shield, shouldn't your shield have a chance to block something before it gets to your Mage Armor?

I thought about just giving Shields a Shield Bonus rather than a Cover bonus, but I like the Reflex aspect and this uses an in-game mechanic which I like.

Thanks.

 

[SpikeyFreak]

Re: Me too

I'm thinking of doing the same thing for a campaign I'm going to start next month. I decided that all shields were actually a form of Cover. A large shield provides half cover (+4 AC, +2 to Reflex saves), a small shield provides one-quarter cover (+2 AC, +1 Reflex) and I made Bucklers be "1/8"th cover (+1 AC, +0 reflex). These bonuses are Cover bonuses and therefore won't stack with Shield or other Cover bonuses.

I haven't implemented this yet, and I'm actually going to let my group vote on whether they want to use it or not. I did this because I'm bothered by the fact that Shield bonuses only stack with mundane Armor bonuses (enhanced or otherwise) but not with Mage Armor or other similar things (Inertial Armor, etc.). Since you aren't Invulnerable if you have Mage Armor up, and someone can still hit you, shouldn't your shield still provide some defense once they get through your Mage Armor? And if you feel Mage Armor surrounds you and not your shield, shouldn't your shield have a chance to block something before it gets to your Mage Armor?

I thought about just giving Shields a Shield Bonus rather than a Cover bonus, but I like the Reflex aspect and this uses an in-game mechanic which I like.

Thanks.

Do you know that if someone has cover then the person who is affected by that has cover too? Is what I just said comprehensible?

If you make shields give 50% cover for the guy carrying them to everyone else, then everyone else is going to have 50% cover to him.

Why can I not explain this where it makes sense?

Anyway, that is assuming you don't house rule it.

--Inexplicable Spikey

 

[Artoomis]

I think shields are just fine as is. They can be enchanted, and even without that large shields already give +2 to AC without much cost and only a weight penalty (well, to non arcane spell casters, anyway).

A fully armored character with a lrage shield can have an AC of 31 without any other magic items - that seems pretty good (+13 for +5 full plate, +7 for +5 large shield and a dex bonus of +1).

Add in other protection items or protection enhancements, and it gets better.

Naturally, you would not be this good until high levels due to the expense.

P.S. Take this discussion to House Rules, please.

 

[Alejandro]

Our current house rule gives all shields (including the Shield spell, tower shields, kappa shells, dastana, and charhar-aina) a shield bonus. My personal house rule goes a step further and compares the size of a shield with the size of the user when determining the shield bonus.

I considered using Cover instead of the shield bonus as described in the Glossary, but decided against it because I wanted Cover to be more tangible than a shield. Plus, Cover in my mind implies facing, and characters are usually assumed to be without facing.

 

[CRGreathouse]

If you have shields grant a different type of bonus, their use will rise among spellcasters drastically - enchantable, low arcane failure (none for mithril buckler), and easily dropped (move-eq).

 

[melkoriii]

Re: Me too

I'm thinking of doing the same thing for a campaign I'm going to start next month. I decided that all shields were actually a form of Cover. A large shield provides half cover (+4 AC, +2 to Reflex saves), a small shield provides one-quarter cover (+2 AC, +1 Reflex) and I made Bucklers be "1/8"th cover (+1 AC, +0 reflex). These bonuses are Cover bonuses and therefore won't stack with Shield or other Cover bonuses.

I haven't implemented this yet, and I'm actually going to let my group vote on whether they want to use it or not. I did this because I'm bothered by the fact that Shield bonuses only stack with mundane Armor bonuses (enhanced or otherwise) but not with Mage Armor or other similar things (Inertial Armor, etc.). Since you aren't Invulnerable if you have Mage Armor up, and someone can still hit you, shouldn't your shield still provide some defense once they get through your Mage Armor? And if you feel Mage Armor surrounds you and not your shield, shouldn't your shield have a chance to block something before it gets to your Mage Armor?

I thought about just giving Shields a Shield Bonus rather than a Cover bonus, but I like the Reflex aspect and this uses an in-game mechanic which I like.

Thanks.

This is how I would do it if I was running a game. I would treat them just like the spell Shield in that they give +AC +Reflx have a facing and dont negate AoO.

 

[chilibean]

You can avoid "cover helping enemies" oddity by simply allowing someone to "uncover" themselves as a free action and the begining of their turn and "recover" themselves at the end.

I like the idea of using shields as cover. I always thought a guy with a shield would have a much better chance of living through a fireball than a guy without one.

Using relative size seems like a good idea too. By the rules, a tower shield helps an ogre as much as it does a halfling. Saying that a shield of the same size category as the weilder would be 50% cover sounds about right. So a small shield would be "small", large shield would be "meduim", and a tower shield would be "large". A titan picking up a halfling's buckler for a shield, is about like me hiding behind a penny. 0.01% cover = +0 AC bonus.

So what about the idea of straping a shield to your back? How would that work, since there is no facing? Maybe it would be half as effective as if you held it (rounded down of course) for AC purposes? People do get hit on the back even when fighting just 1 person. And if you dove to the ground to avoid a fireball, a shield on your back might be very nice.

Of course, if you did that, you might want to make the max dex bonus for shields stack with the armor. So if the armor has a max dex of +3, that would make it a +2 if that person had a small shield also, and only +1 for a large shield. And do that again if they strap a shield to their back. Perhaps, allow the max dex bonus start to go negative? So full plate, a large shield in hand, and a large shield strapped to your back would be a total of -3 dex penalty to armor. Of course, the fact that you're now a big slow clunking mass of metal walking around is offset by the fact that you've got enough steel strapped to you to fend off almost anything.

By the way, does max dex bonus of armor affect your dex bonus for things other than AC while you're wearing it? What about other gear? If you're encumbered, can you still get your full dex bonus? You know, like initative, reflex saves, etc...

 

[melkoriii]

I would just re-name the shield so I could put small, Med and large before there discription.

I would name them

Buckler 1/8th cover
Target Shield 1/4 cover
Kite Shield 1/2 cover
Tower Shield 2/3 cover
Wall Shield 9/10 cover


Then I could have discriptions like a Small target shield that is 1/4 cover for small creatures and 1/8 cover for Med.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Thanks for the feedback, guys!

Take this discussion to House Rules, please.

Good point, sorry.