Confused about tower shields

[Fade]

I understand that tower shields provide a varying amount of cover. But how much do they provide in normal use, with the wielder attacking with the other hand? 1/2? And how much cover does the opponent get from the attacks of the shield user? It wouldn't be the same, because the shield user's weapon is attacking from the unprotected side, whereas the opponent's weapon matches up to the shield (assuming both are right-handed).

 

[Baumi]

You can define the degree of the cover (up to full cover) but the opponet get also the same cover bonus.

It's more a tactical tool than simply an AC-Bonus (like the other shields). But I have to admit that I have seen no one who has used it.

Have FUN!
Baumi

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I've seen clerics use tower shields to provide cover (and therefore AoO immunity) while they heal their companions.

The Sage had a pretty clumsy diagram a while back that made tower shields directional--much like the shield spell. Unfortunately, adding directionality to the tower shield makes the situation immeasurably more complicated tactically. If your DM is foolish enough to rule that way, you could abuse it, attacking at 50% cover and then moving the shield to provide 75% cover or even taking a 5 foot step so that the shield provided no cover to your opponent, attacking and then rotating the shield to provide 75% cover. Unfortunately, your opponents will then be able to take 5 foot steps to attack you when you only get 50% cover. As I said, this ruling adds a lot of unnecessary complexity.

For the sake of completeness the diagram works as follows:

d=Defender
7=Defender has 75% cover against attacks from this square
5=Defender has 50% cover against attacks from this square
x=Defender has no cover against attacks from this square

XXXXX XXXX5
XXDXX XXD55
X575X XX577
57775 X5577

 

[Gromm]

Use my personal rule: Tower Shields suck don't use them.

They're fine for armies, or interesting situations, but basically its like carrying a door around to hide behind. Great if someones shooting arrows at you and you want to walk towards them. Pretty much pointles if a guy with a sword is trying to kill you, either it does no good or gets in everyones way.
Not to mention it brings the game to a stop while you figure it all out every round. Its bad enough dealing with the damn shield spell.

 

[SableWyvern]

Use my personal rule: Tower Shields suck don't use them.

They're fine for armies, or interesting situations, but basically its like carrying a door around to hide behind. Great if someones shooting arrows at you and you want to walk towards them. Pretty much pointles if a guy with a sword is trying to kill you, either it does no good or gets in everyones way.
Not to mention it brings the game to a stop while you figure it all out every round. Its bad enough dealing with the damn shield spell.

Hey Gromm, the Ftr/Wiz in my party uses shield all the time, no hassle. He adjusts his miniature each move to show the facing (of the shield, not him), and is responsible for informing me of his AC with each attack.

 

[evileeyore]

Yeah same here. My Sorceror wouldn't last 2 seconds without Sheild...


Hmmm, considering picking up a Dancing Tower Sheild....

 

[Mahiro Satsu]

Good uses for Bards, etc in combat

have a bard, or other combat useless character take shield proficiency and use him to stand infront of your wizard, or a cleric thats healing someone. He then is a very helpful soul. The tower shield can provide cover from threats and the wizard can duck out enough for 1/2 cover so he can cast, but avoid AoO.

I refer to this tactic as "shield groging" after one of my favorite games, Ars Magica. ::sigh::

 

[Tony Vargas]

The 'faced' version of the Tower Shield, is of limitted usefulness in many situations. If you have friends or terrain close by, so that the enemy can't just casually walk around you to avoid the shield, it's useful, though hardly imbalancingly so. In many situations, it's just worthless. It's very much a military piece of hardware, and not that desireable for most characters. Clerics, who can use it to negate AoOs when healing thier friends in melee, and warrior-types fighting in something resembling 'formations' can make good use of it.

 

[Gromm]

Hey Gromm, the Ftr/Wiz in my party uses shield all the time, no hassle. He adjusts his miniature each move to show the facing (of the shield, not him), and is responsible for informing me of his AC with each attack.

Normally its not much of an issue, but we don't have any minis so its basically a piece of paper with a line for the shield.

My problems usually arise from the whole issue of "half the battlefield" and opponents who step around it (resulting in complaining from the players).
My reasoning is that if something is stopping your attacks, you'll try to see if you can get around it, regardless of what you're fighting. The problems arise when fighting Beasts and such, the players don't think they shouldn't get to walk around the shield. Personally I think +7 AC for a 1st Level spell is a bit much, but the 5' Step makes it less useful (unless you've got friends on your sides).

As far as half the battlefield, it just doesn't make sense at some points. Like this (P=player, E=Enemy):

XXXXXXXXXXXXEXX
XXPXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

According to the rules the Shield works against the enemy, but I just dont see it. I see it as offering very little or even no cover in this situation.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Shields (spell or tower) give you cover, and, I'd expect even the dumbest attacker to try to get past cover...