D&D 5E is a Fighter/cleric etc less powerful using a shield

[dc_in_sf]

5 edition does have some weirdness about clerics spell casting and shields:

1. For a (V,S,M) or (V,M) spell the shield cleric can cast without changing what they hold in their hands. The two hander cleric has to draw their focus (assuming M with no listed gp cost), but can hold their weapon in their other hand.

2. For a (V,S) or (S) spell the two hander can cast without changing what they hold in their hands (well technically they take one hand off their two handed weapon), while the shield cleric has to free up a hand (e.g. sheathe their weapon, drop the shield whatever).

Probably not a big deal, but theoretically could come into play e.g. loss of opportunity attack if weapon is sheathed or if two handed weapon is being held with one hand (and not versatile).

 

[Helldritch]

Both the shield and the two handers are valid. It only depends on the style of play your players want to bring at the table. I do consider the shield option a bit superior since you can mitigate damage a lot more and you have a bit more versatility if you take the appropriate feat. But to kill an enemy earlier is also a valid option. It really all depends on the style you want to play.

 

[Uchawi]

I would view it from a choice perspective. A fighter is more impaired on what choices they can make when deciding to use a shield, or other tactics each round, where a cleric can continue to operate as is. So in that regards, the fighter class should have more tactical choices in regards to shield use from an offensive or defensive perspective. While a cleric can supplement the use with spells.

 

[Blue]

A bit about the slightly more offense (2H weapon) vs. slightly more defense (shield): while it's been said that offense can kill a monster quicker and reduce the damage taken more then a shield can protect, that's not the only case. It's also very possible to kill a monster with it getting the same number of actions as it would with slightly less damage, and then the extra offense didn't help at all. It's basically a give and take when different situations have different advantages.

Also it depends on the character. The 20 STR fighter with extra attack will get more advantage from a 2H weapon while a single attack (if they don't cast) 16 STR cleric who wants to keep concentration going on bless to buff the big damage dealers will get a lot more for the party out of taking a shield.

 

[Flamestrike]

Ive been thinking of a (Sword and Board) warrior with Tavern Brawler (proficiency in improvised weapons i.e Shield bash), Dual weilder (lets me use non light weapons) and TWF style.

Total combo is +3 to AC (2 from shield, 1 from dual weilder) and an off hand attack dealing 1d4+Str. Its pretty suboptimal but could be fun.

Im thinking Fighter 4/ Paladin 16.

I want 3 fighting styles though (TWF, Protection and Defence) and 3 feats (Tavern Brawler, Dual Wielder and Shield Master) but the extra F/S involves a dip into Ranger and I cant be bothered.

 

[Helldritch]

Ive been thinking of a (Sword and Board) warrior with Tavern Brawler (proficiency in improvised weapons i.e Shield bash), Dual weilder (lets me use non light weapons) and TWF style.

Total combo is +3 to AC (2 from shield, 1 from dual weilder) and an off hand attack dealing 1d4+Str. Its pretty suboptimal but could be fun.

Im thinking Fighter 4/ Paladin 16.

At best, the shield might count as an improvised weapon. Improvised weapon can't be factored in with dual wielder. So you are quite stuck with only shield master to help you out with your shield. Defensive style will up your AC. But your dmg loss from not taking duelist might not be a wise choice. Unless your DM uses the Mark option in the DMG.

I want 3 fighting styles though (TWF, Protection and Defence) and 3 feats (Tavern Brawler, Dual Wielder and Shield Master) but the extra F/S involves a dip into Ranger and I cant be bothered.

Unfortunately, only the Champion subclass of fighter can ever have two fighting styles and that is at level 10. Fighting style features are not cumulative. And I do think it's a good thing.

 

[Flamestrike]

At best, the shield might count as an improvised weapon. Improvised weapon can't be factored in with dual wielder.

Yes it can. Show me the rule that says it cant.

You can use two light improvised weapons at the same time (a DM can rule a broken bottle is a light, finesse improvised weapon, or a heavy rebar is a heavy improvised weapon that deals more than 1d4 damage).

With Dual weilder the weapons you dual weild no longer need to be light. Meaning you can weild two improvised weapons (one in each hand).

Unfortunately, only the Champion subclass of fighter can ever have two fighting styles and that is at level 10. Fighting style features are not cumulative. And I do think it's a good thing.

Wrong gain mate.

Multiple of the same fighting style do not stack, but you can have multiple fighting styles.

A Paladin/ Fighter can have defence (from fighter) and GWM (from Paladin).

 

[Helldritch]

Yes it can. Show me the rule that says it cant.

You can use two light improvised weapons at the same time (a DM can rule a broken bottle is a light, finesse improvised weapon, or a heavy rebar is a heavy improvised weapon that deals more than 1d4 damage).

With Dual weilder the weapons you dual weild no longer need to be light. Meaning you can weild two improvised weapons (one in each hand).

P146 PHB Weapons are in two categories: Simple and Martial.
P148 PHB. If your improvised weapon doesn't resemble a known weapon it does not qualify as a weapon in either category.
Dual wielder does specify weapons. And not improvised weapon (which is not a category).
If your DM allows that, it is his call. I would not. Dual shields wielding combattant?

Wrong gain mate.

Multiple of the same fighting style do not stack, but you can have multiple fighting styles.

A Paladin/ Fighter can have defence (from fighter) and GWM (from Paladin).

What I was meaning is that you would have to choose which style you would use each round. Not that you can't have them (poor wording of my part) but I really don't think that the RAI is to use that much styles in one round. Your are defending or protecting not both. But I will admit that this one may be a moot point as I know some DM that allows that.

There was a similar thread in here before they had to revert to an old save. From memory, some tweets from the devs clarified things.

 

[abirdcall]

P146 PHB Weapons are in two categories: Simple and Martial.
P148 PHB. If your improvised weapon doesn't resemble a known weapon it does not qualify as a weapon in either category.
Dual wielder does specify weapons. And not improvised weapon (which is not a category).
If your DM allows that, it is his call. I would not. Dual shields wielding combattant?

Wait, are you arguing that an improvised weapon is not a weapon?

 

[Flamestrike]

P146 PHB Weapons are in two categories: Simple and Martial.
P148 PHB. If your improvised weapon doesn't resemble a known weapon it does not qualify as a weapon in either category.
Dual wielder does specify weapons. And not improvised weapon (which is not a category).

An improvised weapon, is a weapon.

It says so right on the tin.

Look in the weapon section. There is a whole section on improvised weapons.

Rage bonus to damage specifies weapons. Paladin smite specifies weapons. Etc, Etc Etc.

Id be mighty pissed if you didnt let a PC fight with two broken bottles, or shards of glass, or knitting needles or shivs or whatever, but let him do it with knives.

Makes zero sense, and is against the plain english meaning of the word 'weapon'.

If your DM allows that, it is his call. I would not.

Glad I dont play in your game then.

Dual shields wielding combattant?

Presuming the dude has Tavern Brawler (for proficiency in improvised weapons) and the Dual weilder feat (shields are not light improvised weapons) then yeah sure.

The shield bonus to AC doesnt stack, so you waste 2 feats (basically two levels of abilities) to make an attack with your main hand as an action dealing 1d4 + Str damage, and your bonus action to deal 1d4 damage.

If you also have TWF style, you can add your Str to your off hand as well.

Woefully suboptimal.

If you dont think a person can do it, go outside and grab two rubbish bin lids (one in each hand), and start hitting something.

What I was meaning is that you would have to choose which style you would use each round.

No, you dont have to do anything of the sort.

If you have defence and dueling are wearing armor and using a single weapon in one hand, you get +1 to AC and +2 damage all the time.

I really don't think that the RAI is to use that much styles in one round.

The RAW and RAI is clear. You most certainly can.