D&D (2024) How to balance the shield spell?

[tetrasodium]

If it's proactive, I feel like that will just encourage GMs to not target the player. That's something of a victory, but at the same time it's less valuable.

If the squishy PC isn't targeted because they cast a defensive spell it means that the spell worked optimally for the player. A crunchy PC doesn't need shield. If the rules are again constructed in a way that leaves no PC something that could be considered squishy those rules and the spell are at fault for their poor design.

Some of those problems are avoided if the shield spell were to just animate a physical shield in the PC's possession. A squishy PC can get better shields if the GM feels like there is enough need to award them. A crunchy sword & board PC gets a free hand the ability to dual wield or the option of using 2 handed weapons. A PC who is dual wielding or using a two handed weapon gets a free hand or a bit more defense. None of them get to do all of those things and add a second shield like the current +5AC version does

 

[Justice and Rule]

If the squishy PC isn't targeted because they cast a defensive spell it means that the spell worked optimally for the player. A crunchy PC doesn't need shield. If the rules are again constructed in a way that leaves no PC something that could be considered squishy those rules and the spell are at fault for their poor design.

Some of those problems are avoided if the shield spell were to just animate a physical shield in the PC's possession. A squishy PC can get better shields if the GM feels like there is enough need to award them. A crunchy sword & board PC gets a free hand the ability to dual wield or the option of using 2 handed weapons. A PC who is dual wielding or using a two handed weapon gets a free hand or a bit more defense. None of them get to do all of those things and add a second shield like the current +5AC version does

You could potentially do that. Actually, that's kind of how PF2 treats Shield: it's a cantrip that acts like a lesser version of a shield that you can use to raise your defense or, in a clinch, absorb some damage. The benefit is that when the spell shatters, you can use it 10 minutes later, while a physical shield just stays shattered.

But that spell basically already exists: Armor of Faith does that as a 1st-Level Spell.

 

[Clint_L]

If you aren't targeting them, then they aren't using them for Shield. It's not a proactive spell, it's a reactive one, so this argument falls apart because when you do try to do something about it you can't.

Not really, because now it's a strategy game - as soon as I see the paladin turtling up, I switch targets (they've just used their reaction, so I can disengage with impunity). Now they have choices to make - to switch to offence and start burning spell slots that way, how many to keep in reserve in case I switch back, and so on. With each use of smite they have one less potential shield, so suddenly those four rounds are down to two rounds of combined offence and defence...at which point I can basically ignore the paladin altogether.

Shield balances itself on a class like paladin with limited spell slots and several competing uses for them. How many times can that level 4 paladin actually use it between long rests? Once? Twice? So they sacrifice significant offence to jack up their AC to near invulnerable levels for a couple rounds every adventuring day...and that breaks the game?

Sure, if you think a class dip is worth it just for that, go for it.

Edit: The more we run actual numbers, the more I think shield isn't OP. Except that paladin dips are not where the spell really impacts the game. At all.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

The problem with Shield is that it never scales and is always relevant. Listing it as +3 AC instead, with a +1 per slot level above 1, would balance it out IMO.

The AC shouldn't scale though. That's the entire point of bounded accuracy. The +5 AC is so good that it may as well make you immune to attacks for a round, with a resource that is largely inconsequential. It's not like a 1st level magic missile has relevance later on, but AC buffs/penalties have disproportionate value.

I think 24 hour duration, +2 AC, doesnt stack with an existing shield. End spell as a reaction to absorb 5 HP per spell level. That way AC's are kept largely within their target range.

 

[mellored]

Not really, because now it's a strategy game

Making something into a strategy game is a good thing IMO.

Still don't want level 1 Shield to block ancient dragons attacks as easily as goblin ones.

 

[tetrasodium]

You could potentially do that. Actually, that's kind of how PF2 treats Shield: it's a cantrip that acts like a lesser version of a shield that you can use to raise your defense or, in a clinch, absorb some damage. The benefit is that when the spell shatters, you can use it 10 minutes later, while a physical shield just stays shattered.

But that spell basically already exists: Armor of Faith does that as a 1st-Level Spell.

The PF2 shield spell is rather different from what I was suggesting & probably too good for d&d as well. Animated shield is a magic item anyone can use as long as they aren't already using a shield. anyone can use that +2, but only that +2, it keeps things in check & makes the benefit for crunchier types the fact that they can use that hand for something else while keeping or gaining that +2. Squishier types are likely either freeing a hand or getting a +2 they otherwise couldn't without penalties beyond consuming the spell slot.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

There are plenty of ways to do it. But it needs to get away from AC and switch to damage.

A level 1 spell shouldn't be equally effective against a goblin and an accent red dragon.

It's not, though. An ancient dragon is far more likely than a goblin to roll high enough for to-hit that Shield won't help.

 

[CleverNickName]

Tangent to the topic:
Have you ever had an enemy NPC use Counterspell on a player character's Shield spell?
The look on their face is always priceless.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Not really, because now it's a strategy game - as soon as I see the paladin turtling up, I switch targets (they've just used their reaction, so I can disengage with impunity). Now they have choices to make - to switch to offence and start burning spell slots that way, how many to keep in reserve in case I switch back, and so on. With each use of smite they have one less potential shield, so suddenly those four rounds are down to two rounds of combined offence and defence...at which point I can basically ignore the paladin altogether.

Shield balances itself on a class like paladin with limited spell slots and several competing uses for them. How many times can that level 4 paladin actually use it between long rests? Once? Twice? So they sacrifice significant offence to jack up their AC to near invulnerable levels for a couple rounds every adventuring day...and that breaks the game?

Sure, if you think a class dip is worth it just for that, go for it.

Edit: The more we run actual numbers, the more I think shield isn't OP. Except that paladin dips are not where the spell really impacts the game. At all.

No, I don't agree.

Firstly, you're just wrong on spell slots. At 4th level they may be a bit strapped, but let's just go up a level... and suddenly they've doubled the amount of slots they have, including two 2nd Level slots. Suddenly they aren't as strapped as they once were, and those 1st Level slots won't provide as much bang for the buck for smites but they'll still get the maximum out of Shield. As the Paladin goes up (really just past 5th Level) they are not nearly as resource-strapped as you make them out to be.

Secondly, you can talk tactics and how to mitigate, but the players are just as likely to find ways around that. Are you in a cramped area? Suddenly you have someone who can block a hallway like nobody's business who doesn't care if he used his reaction. I've been that guy before. Try to run around in open spaces? You get kited while the Paladin gets free whacks at you in pursuit. And if you aren't attacking him, he's attacking you. At the end, if you could just attack someone else who was easier, why even attack the Paladin in the first place? The point is that the Paladin is going to be a threat, and they'll continue to be a threat while Shield-ed and they're going to have enough resources once they hit the level jump.

Again, the big point here is that Shield is perfect for using low-level slots that the Paladin can sacrifice for those things to become pretty damn impenetrable. If you want to make Shield less of an auto-take and something more interesting, give it new utility but also limit it. As it stands, it's not a particularly well-constructed spell and it's dull as hell.

The PF2 shield spell is rather different from what I was suggesting & probably too good for d&d as well. Animated shield is a magic item anyone can use as long as they aren't already using a shield. anyone can use that +2, but only that +2, it keeps things in check & makes the benefit for crunchier types the fact that they can use that hand for something else while keeping or gaining that +2. Squishier types are likely either freeing a hand or getting a +2 they otherwise couldn't without penalties beyond consuming the spell slot.

Oh sure, PF2's spell operates on different ideas with different benefits. Shield of Faith (I misremembered the name) is basically a magical shield for 10 minutes with Concentration.

 

[mellored]

It's not, though. An ancient dragon is far more likely than a goblin to roll high enough for to-hit that Shield won't help.

On the contrary.

Shield might only block a goblin rolls of 17, 18, or 19. Effectively only giving a +3 AC.
And only blocking 5 damage.