Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 9345119" data-attributes="member: 7006">I always thought the complaint about the Shield spell was that it was too much too soon and that it never got better as the caster did?  Which is why a typical response I always saw to amend the spell was to keep it exactly as-is, except the AC bonus was equal to the caster's proficiency bonus rather than a flat +5.Granted... the flat +5 was assumed to be the caster gaining essentially 3/4s cover (like anyone could get standing behind an arrow slit)... which is why it was always a flat number.  Although the spell also did not say that it granted 3/4s cover, which means that in theory the caster could be behind that cover and use Shield as well, which was part of the problem.</blockquote>