Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ccooke" data-source="post: 6435758" data-attributes="member: 6695890">I think removing the AC bonus if you attack with a shield is just too much faff. One of the best things about 5e is that it doesn't need constant recalculation.Consider:Under the actual rules of 5e, you get the AC bonus from a shield while you wield it. There is no condition or exemption - wear a shield, get +2 to AC. Keeping the bonus to AC isn't a house rule; removing it is. As to the suggestion that shields not losing their AC bonus when you attack with them gives the Sword-and-Board fighter an advantage over the Two-Weapon Fighter, I have to admit I find that hilarious. Under the rules, a sword-and-board fighter can choose to either attack with their proficient, probably 1d8 damage weapon or they can attack with their shield as an improvised weapon, doing 1d4 damage and with a minimum -2 penalty to hit. Even with the +2 to AC, I don't see how that can possibly encroach upon the TWF's territory. If you allow the Sword-and-Board fighter the Dual Wielder feat, they can attack with a bonus action using their shield... still at a minimum -2 to hit and for only 1d4+STR mod damage. However, to be fair you would also have to allow the TWF the same feat. Which means the two-weapon specialist can now dual wield weapons that do 1d8 damage rather than 1d6, and they get a +1 AC bonus to boot.Note that the sword-and-board fighter with the Dual Wielder feat does not get an extra +1 to AC by the rules as written; the extra bonus applies only when the character has a one-handed melee weapon in each hand. Shields are not weapons.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ccooke, post: 6435758, member: 6695890"] I think removing the AC bonus if you attack with a shield is just too much faff. One of the best things about 5e is that it doesn't need constant recalculation. Consider: Under the actual rules of 5e, you get the AC bonus from a shield while you wield it. There is no condition or exemption - wear a shield, get +2 to AC. Keeping the bonus to AC isn't a house rule; removing it is. As to the suggestion that shields not losing their AC bonus when you attack with them gives the Sword-and-Board fighter an advantage over the Two-Weapon Fighter, I have to admit I find that hilarious. Under the rules, a sword-and-board fighter can choose to [b]either[/b] attack with their proficient, probably 1d8 damage weapon [B]or[/B] they can attack with their shield as an improvised weapon, doing 1d4 damage and with a minimum -2 penalty to hit. Even with the +2 to AC, I don't see how that can possibly encroach upon the TWF's territory. If you allow the Sword-and-Board fighter the Dual Wielder feat, they can attack with a bonus action using their shield... still at a minimum -2 to hit and for only 1d4+STR mod damage. However, to be fair you would also have to allow the TWF the same feat. Which means the two-weapon specialist can now dual wield weapons that do 1d8 damage rather than 1d6, and they get a +1 AC bonus to boot. Note that the sword-and-board fighter with the Dual Wielder feat does [B]not[/B] get an extra +1 to AC by the rules as written; the extra bonus applies only when the character has a one-handed melee weapon in each hand. Shields are not weapons. [/QUOTE]

Verification