D&D 5E Dual wielding and improvised weapons. Technically broken?

[Blue]

The guy who wrote the rule told us he thinks they stack. We don't have to guess at intent here. Not that your ruling is necessarily a bad one - but it doesn't appear to have the intent backing of the game designer here. Again, rule it how you want.

Please provide a quote that he feels that the +2 AC for shields and +1 AC for dual wielding a shield as an improvised weapon should stack.

He did say that you should be able to bash with it and keep the AC (though my table doesn't agree), but I don't see anywhere that he says the ACs should stack.

 

[Mistwell]

D&D isn't *always* a cinematic game. It can be, but not always. So that argument is like saying "there's plenty of Wuxia support in for that sort of claim."

Weird. My sentence talked about both cinematic and real life support. You cut the real life support part, and then strawmanned me claiming it's not all about cinematic support. In fact, you even altered my actual sentence, inserting a period where there was a comma, to misrepresent my sentence. And it's not like this was an editing issue - you posted an hour after my last edit, so it's not that. OK then, I guess our conversation is done. If you want to have an actual conversation, as opposed to you cheating on your die rolls like that and pretending to declare victory, you let me know.

 

[Mistwell]

Are you playing a game with Torch Proficiency, and unless your torches are actively wielded they don't give off light? Giving off light is a property of the torch, it will do it regardless if someone is holding it. However the shield need a proficiency and to be used in order to do have it's effect.

Fine, a set of thieves tools. A rogue Thief of the appropriate level can use their thieves tools as a bonus action (which involves their proficiency) and then attack you with those same thieves tools as a regular action using them as an improvised weapon. They can be both, in the same six second round. Same with the instrument example Jester raised and then dropped once I responded to it - you can continue playing the instrument as part of a move or action, AND you can attack with that same instrument as an improvised weapon.

There is nothing in the rules that I know of that says an object must be used in only one manner in any given turn - and the only rule that mentions it (Cleric using a shield with a holy symbol on it) says you can use it as both a shield and a holy symbol simultaneously, which is precedent for what we're discussing. And then the only comments from designers about the rule says you can use it both ways simultaneously. ALL the support from the game itself (designers or rules) says you can use it the way I am arguing. If it can have multiple different types of uses (like as an improvised weapon and as a tool or instrument or light source or whatever) and you have the actions/abilities to use it as both, you can use it as both. This "it must be one or the other in any given turn" doesn't appear to have rules-based support that I am aware of, and nobody has cited any rule I know of to support it.

Which again, doesn't mean a ruling the opposite way isn't fair. I am not even calling it a house rule - I am not sure that's really a solid concept anymore anyway - rule it however it works best for you. I am just saying I'd rule it that way, and I see a lot of support for ruling that way, and it makes both cinematic and real life logic to me to rule it that way.

 

[Mistwell]

Please provide a quote that he feels that the +2 AC for shields and +1 AC for dual wielding a shield as an improvised weapon should stack.

He did say that you should be able to bash with it and keep the AC (though my table doesn't agree), but I don't see anywhere that he says the ACs should stack.

That's the conclusion I draw from all his tweets on the topic (or else I think he'd say something about them not stacking), but just to clarify I just asked him on Twitter. I will re-post his response when/if he replies.

 

[Jester David]

Weird. My sentence talked about both cinematic and real life support. You cut the real life support part, and then strawmanned me claiming it's not all about cinematic support. In fact, you even altered my actual sentence, inserting a period where there was a comma, to misrepresent my sentence. And it's not like this was an editing issue - you posted an hour after my last edit, so it's not that. OK then, I guess our conversation is done. If you want to have an actual conversation, as opposed to you cheating on your die rolls like that and pretending to declare victory, you let me know.

(Actually... it was an editing issue. I wrote my responses in Google Docs during work during free seconds over the hour, based on a "you have been quoted" e-mail and posted during a break via my iPad that can bypass the office firewall. And failed to notice that you had edited. That's why there's no "View Post" icon by the quoted text, as it was just cut-and-pasted from an e-mail, which didn't update when edited. Sorry, my bad, I'll have to edit your correct text into my post.)

 

[Mistwell]

(Actually... it was an editing issue. I wrote my responses in Google Docs during work during free seconds over the hour, based on a "you have been quoted" e-mail and posted during a break via my iPad that can bypass the office firewall. And failed to notice that you had edited. That's why there's no "View Post" icon by the quoted text, as it was just cut-and-pasted from an e-mail, which didn't update when edited. Sorry, my bad, I'll have to edit your correct text into my post.)

OK, fair enough. And...I should have thought that might have happened. Sorry for the accusation without giving you the benefit of the doubt.

 

[pemerton]

I absolutely agree with you about this concept. Now, please apply your logic to the main thrust of this thread. You get to pick to use an item ONE way, and it doesn't apply the OTHER way.

If I use a shield as a shield, I get the shield bonuses (+2 AC). If I use the shield as an improvised weapon (and therefore don't use it as a shield), then I get the two weapon bonuses.

I don't agree that the two categories have to align.

That is, I agree that the player has to toggle the shield on/off as a weapon, for purposes of improvised duel-wielding vs dueling style.

But I don't agree that this toggling has to involve the shield bonus to AC being lost/gained. Because (unlike duelling style) nowhere do the rules say that a shield doesn't grant its AC bonus when used as a weapon. (Do they?)

If there was a balance reason to make such a ruling that would be a good reason, but so far, based on this thread, there doesn't seem to be one.

 

[pemerton]

If a 1st level character reduces a kobold's damage by 1/6th they have saved themselves 4 damage

How so? Kobolds don't do 24 hp of damage.

 

[Blue]

There is nothing in the rules that I know of that says an object must be used in only one manner in any given turn - and the only rule that mentions it (Cleric using a shield with a holy symbol on it) says you can use it as both a shield and a holy symbol simultaneously, which is precedent for what we're discussing.

Let's start that the rules do not show every single interaction of every rule with another, so we won't find either of our points spelled out in black and white. I think that there is reasonable amount of guidance in the rules but I don't know if it will overcome a significant enough burden of evidence to convince everyone.

Using Player Basic Rules v2.0 (standard, not the printer-friendly version)

(pg 44)
Shields. A shield is made from wood or metal and is carried in one hand. Wielding a shield increases your Armor Class by 2. You can benefit from only one shield at a time.

(pg 47)
Improvised Weapons
Sometimes characters don’t have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is close at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin.

Key word in both of these to me is "wielding". And the question seems to be if you can wield something as a shield at the same time you are wielding the same thing as a weapon.

In the basic rules I searched on "wield" and got no formal definition of it. If you can find something in the actual books that might shed more light. Otherwise I'm going to have to look farther afield.

Weapon Proficiency and Shield Proficiency are separate proficiencies. You do not automatically have one if you have the other. So they are not done the same way because that would require them being both granted together if it was only one thing.

So I have this object. I can Wield it using my Shield Proficiency. It then gives me +2 AC. I can Wield it using my Weapon Proficiency (or lack thereof, but improvised weapons still need to be wielded to be used) for various effect.

And this is where I think we disagree. I see the rules requiring you to wield them in different ways because it takes different proficiencies. What am I missing in the rules (besides "silence") that counteracts that?

Fine, a set of thieves tools. A rogue Thief of the appropriate level can use their thieves tools as a bonus action (which involves their proficiency) and then attack you with those same thieves tools as a regular action using them as an improvised weapon.

Tool Proficiencies are also not Shield Proficiency. At my table you could not use tools to pick an lock and attack with the same tools in the same turn, or play a violin while also attacking with it. (Unless you have the Feat: Lindsey Sterling)

But that follows the same logic I used earlier, because it's not clearly spelled out either way. If it works for your table, go for it - that's really what matters.

 

[Mistwell]

And this is where I think we disagree. I see the rules requiring you to wield them in different ways because it takes different proficiencies. What am I missing in the rules (besides "silence") that counteracts that?

Proficiency is not, in any way I can think of, related to what can and cannot be used in general. It's just, generally speaking, about what bonus or penalty you get for using it. So I don't see it being a guideline for "you cannot use this thing as two different things". In addition, as I stated earlier, you can be proficient with the use of a holy symbol as a component for your spells, and with shields, and we know the rules let you use that shield with the holy symbol as both simultaneously. So the one example we have of two proficiencies for one item says you can do it. The only other one I can think of is an instrument as a spell component and as a tool to entertain simultaneously - two proficiencies, and again the rules let you do it.