Is the shield spell too powerful?

[Happiest_Sadist]

It's not that bad because you can use ready actionsd for when the caster does anything since it moves out of the way, and it can be moved abound with something as simple as a 5 foot step iin melee.

 

[plavi]

Since we almost never, ever play with the battlegrid in combat but much more rely on descriptions, it was rather hard to keep track of the facing, so we changed it as follows:

Range becomes touch, so i can be cast on others too.
In all other effects, it becomes like a shield, so it gives a +2 armor bonus, that stacks with mage armor and suits of armor (just as a normal shield would) but not with a shield armor bonus or other armor bonuses. Also, it does retain the immunity to MM. Everybody is happy with it (especially the monk) and the Sorcerer isn't too beat up about it, for his AC is decent enough as it is (mage armor, cat's grace, shield, haste, etc)

Regards

 

[haiiro]

The facing is definitely the big balancing factor -- and I find that it tends to face the "wrong" way enough of the time to keep it from being overpowered. Limited duration helps, and making it second level probably wouldn't be unwarranted. I've never seen anyone do seriously twinky things with it, though, so put a large grain of salt next to my opinion.

I don't have d20 Modern, but I'm all in favor of a version of sheild that requires less bookeeping. hong's +4 AC and +2 to REF saves approach sounds pretty good overall, perhaps with the added bonus of negating MMs.

 

[Darklone]

The main problem I have with it is that every fighter wants to take one level of spellcaster just for that spell.

Dr. Zoom: There are several printings of the PHB which gives different rulings. My PHB states explicitely that the spell grants a cover bonus that does not prohibit AoOs, other PHBs state the opposite.

The semi official ruling from the FAQ states the "no cover, therefore AoOs".

I will not change the spell in my games, I simply disallow multiclassing with one level just for that spell

 

[Zerovoid]

I think the shield spell is very powerful, but I'm happy with it as is. Some people complain that it makes multiclass fighters too good, but in my experience, multiclassed spellcasters are rare enough that I'd rather have something like shield that promotes playing them.

Also, since you can rotate the shield, once the opponents know where it is, it becomes sort of a guessing game... You can move the shield to the back on your turn, hoping the rogue will try to sneak behind you, or you can keep it in front, assuming that your enemy will guess that the shield is behind you.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I've used the D20 Modern version, and it's still popular.
There's no annoying "which way is the shield facing" or "a smart fighter can take a 5 foot step..." annoyances to deal with.

 

[Ravellion]

From the D20 Modern SRD, sionce some people seem unfamiliar with it:

Shield
Abjuration [Force]
Level: Arcane 1; Components: V, S; Casting Time: Attack action; Range: Personal; Target: You; Duration: 1 minute/level (D)
Shield creates an invisible, mobile disk of force that hovers in front of the caster. It negates magic missile attacks directed at the caster. The disk also intercepts attacks, providing a +4 bonus to Defense. The shield carries no armor penalty or arcane spell failure chance.

 

[der_kluge]

Those of you who have versions that change it to +4 to AC, do you still allow it to stack with Mage Armor?

I'm thinking a +4 deflection bonus to AC, and +2 to reflex saves. Personal only, though.

 

[Apok]

I think the shield spell is very powerful, but I'm happy with it as is. Some people complain that it makes multiclass fighters too good, but in my experience, multiclassed spellcasters are rare enough that I'd rather have something like shield that promotes playing them.

Hear, hear!

Anything that makes playing a multiclassed fighter/spellcaster more desireable is Fine By Me. As it stands, they are rather difficult to make effectively in 3e (and no, I'm not talking about those spellcaster 1/Fighter X combos but something more even in its breakdown).

Does it bother anyone else that it seems Multiclassing evenly between two or more classes is just no longer effective?

 

[kengar]

Does it bother anyone else that it seems Multiclassing evenly between two or more classes is just no longer effective?

The last campaign in which I was a player, my character was a Kobold rogue/illusionist (No Sorcerers in this world and Kobolds were roughly the equiv to halflings). He made it to 6th level before getting killed and was Rog4/Wiz2 at the time. I was very near 7th and would have taken Wiz3 at that point (Improved Invis.! Woohoo!). My ultimate progression plan was Rog13/Wiz7. Not perfectly even, but I definitely planned on getting more than just 1-2 levels. I felt he was a pretty effective character, but sometimes he was overshadowed by the "single-class" wizard of the party.