Ring of Force Shield and Two-handed weapons

[Shirt Guy John]

Just get a different ring!

If this is such a huge problem, just purchase a ring of protection for that hand's ring slot. Protection can give more than a +2 bonus anyways.

 

[hong]

I can easily see someone switching grips after striking with a swing, especially if it's a weapon than can normally be wielded in one or two hands (i.e. bastard sword or waraxe).

It would probably also be easy for the other guy to hit you when he notices that the shield is off. Even if the shield was invisible, the fact that you've switched grips on the weapon would be a clue.

Personally, this activate/deactivate trick contains too much metagaming for my taste. Yes, you can technically do it under the rules, but that just emphasises the limitations of a ugo-igo ruleset in simulating actual combat. I would say that you can activate or deactivate the ring as a free action_once_, but its effects then last until the start of your next round.

 

[burdett]

My reasoning...

I would allow a player to use this item in conjunction with a 2H weapon for the following reasons...

1) The shield that the ring generates has no weight. Unlike a real shield the only thing you need to do to block is will the shield to be there.

2) The shield can be activated and deactivated at will as a free action. Some say that this is 'metagaming', I say that in a fight to the death you use whatever advantages you can find to win. This is true both in the game and in real life.

3) The cost of the item lends support to the idea that it could be used in this manner.

4) For heavens' sake, it's only a +2 AC bonus.

 

[hong]

Re: My reasoning...

2) The shield can be activated and deactivated at will as a free action. Some say that this is 'metagaming', I say that in a fight to the death you use whatever advantages you can find to win. This is true both in the game and in real life.

Do you even know what the word "metagaming" means?

The rules are an abstract model. As with any abstract model, they won't represent reality with complete accuracy. The trick with modelling isn't to ensure there are no holes; it's to ensure that any holes that do exist aren't in interesting places.

As far as I'm concerned, this activate/deactivate trick is a hole in the model of reality as presented by the rules. Because of that, I don't have any qualms about disallowing it. Assuming that any hole that's found can and should be exploited, is to mistake the map for the terrain.

 

[rhammer2]

Re: My reasoning...

Your reasons are flawed. A shield must be in position, not just in existence to be used. The game mechanic is simulating simultaneous actions, you can not both attack with a two handed weapon and defend yourself with a shield, every time you swing you remove the shield from its defensive position. The cost of the item is because it will stack with real armor and with a deflection bonus just as a regular shield does and it is very useful to clerics. They can choose to turn the shield off for a round and cast their spells while holding a weapon in their other hand, they can't do this with a regular shield.

I would allow a player to use this item in conjunction with a 2H weapon for the following reasons...

1) The shield that the ring generates has no weight. Unlike a real shield the only thing you need to do to block is will the shield to be there.

2) The shield can be activated and deactivated at will as a free action. Some say that this is 'metagaming', I say that in a fight to the death you use whatever advantages you can find to win. This is true both in the game and in real life.

3) The cost of the item lends support to the idea that it could be used in this manner.

4) For heavens' sake, it's only a +2 AC bonus.

 

[Caliban]

It would probably also be easy for the other guy to hit you when he notices that the shield is off. Even if the shield was invisible, the fact that you've switched grips on the weapon would be a clue.

Sure it would. It's called a "Readied Action"

Personally, this activate/deactivate trick contains too much metagaming for my taste. Yes, you can technically do it under the rules, but that just emphasises the limitations of a ugo-igo ruleset in simulating actual combat. I would say that you can activate or deactivate the ring as a free action_once_, but its effects then last until the start of your next round.

That's contrary to the item description, and effectively nullifies it's usefulness.

I would say that the force shield ring is intended to be used with two handed weapons in general, and one-handed/two-handed weapons in particular. It's really not very useful outside of that specific situation. (And even in that situation, it's only +2 AC. Woohoo.)

 

[hong]

Sure it would. It's called a "Readied Action"

I think this is using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. You should not need to use this mechanic simply to make a riposte against someone who drops his guard.

That's contrary to the item description,

So? That just means the item is badly described.

and effectively nullifies it's usefulness.

That's not my problem, that's the problem of whoever still wants to use it.

I would say that the force shield ring is intended to be used with two handed weapons in general, and one-handed/two-handed weapons in particular. It's really not very useful outside of that specific situation. (And even in that situation, it's only +2 AC. Woohoo.)

Intent has nothing to do with it. It breaks my sense of disbelief. If someone really wants to get a bonus to AC with a two-handed weapon, they can always use a regular ring of protection.

 

[Thanee]

Well, the way I understand D&D combat to work, the ring is just useless for a fighter with a two-handed sword, yes!

The system is abstract, you do not act for a moment in time, then stand around for a period of time about 10 times that long, doing nothing and just waiting to act again.

If you are attacking, you are attacking for the whole round, and if you are using your shield arm to attack you won't be able to block any hits with it for the whole round.

The ring specifically states, that it has to be wielded like a normal shield and this is how normal shields work. Turning it on and off will not change this in any way.

Bye
Thanee

 

[smetzger]

Because of the rules given for bucklers, which are - by the rules - the only shields who even allow the use of two hands, and therefore are the only shields the Force Shield can compare to.

Since the Force Shield has to be wielded, you cannot use it while using a greatsword. You can - as outlined above - deactiviate it to use the greatsword and activate it afterwards, but it would still not grant an AC bonus for one turn, since you cannot wield it properly, because you attacked with your shield arm during your last action (see buckler rule).

1) Bucklers and Force Shields are two different things.
2) No, Last action was a free action to turn the shield back on. Therefore shield is only down during your attack not for a whole turn. Buckler rule doesn't apply because it is not a buckler.

 

[Thanee]

Force Shields are not animated, you do not just hit the on switch and they protect you, you have to do that yourself. Also see my last post about time and abstract D&D combat.

Bye
Thanee