Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7160050" data-attributes="member: 6785785">I think it varies by class and build and what the player is going for. Some classes have options that make using a shield less viable. Other class abilities and feats make use of a shield viable. My group had a paladin with a shield who had the defensive style as his choice, and he would stand next to the rogue and/or the fighter, and let them skewer things while he used his shield to help them out once a round, and would often dodge to absorb some attacks. Now, many folks would criticize this as &quot;sub-optimal&quot; because the paladin could have been attacking and also could have been adding smite damage on any hits he scored. And that's a valid approach. But, if they managed to get through the encounter without taking many hits, and without expending other resources, then it seems the better choice, no? A rogue's sneak attack isn't limited by rest or day, and neither is the defensive reaction of the paladin's style, or the fighter's ability to attack. Better to use those resources than ones that are gone until a rest of some sort is taken, no?But again, this is where things start to get overly analytical. I think that the best way to look at it is that I've seen a paladin with a shield be a very effective part of an effective party. The variables are too many to definitively declare one approach universally better than the other. Removing one encounter and breaking it down simply to numbers without considering the importance of the encounter in the overall adventuring day, the number of encounters, the strength of the party at the start of the encounter, and any number of other contextual elements isn't really all that helpful.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 7160050, member: 6785785"] I think it varies by class and build and what the player is going for. Some classes have options that make using a shield less viable. Other class abilities and feats make use of a shield viable. My group had a paladin with a shield who had the defensive style as his choice, and he would stand next to the rogue and/or the fighter, and let them skewer things while he used his shield to help them out once a round, and would often dodge to absorb some attacks. Now, many folks would criticize this as "sub-optimal" because the paladin could have been attacking and also could have been adding smite damage on any hits he scored. And that's a valid approach. But, if they managed to get through the encounter without taking many hits, and without expending other resources, then it seems the better choice, no? A rogue's sneak attack isn't limited by rest or day, and neither is the defensive reaction of the paladin's style, or the fighter's ability to attack. Better to use those resources than ones that are gone until a rest of some sort is taken, no? But again, this is where things start to get overly analytical. I think that the best way to look at it is that I've seen a paladin with a shield be a very effective part of an effective party. The variables are too many to definitively declare one approach universally better than the other. Removing one encounter and breaking it down simply to numbers without considering the importance of the encounter in the overall adventuring day, the number of encounters, the strength of the party at the start of the encounter, and any number of other contextual elements isn't really all that helpful. [/QUOTE]

Verification