D&D 5E Shield Attacks and AC Bonus

[Mistwell]

This may have been touched on earlier.

For those that believe attacking with a shield is like attacking with a mace, does the duelist fight style apply?

I believe sage advice said it does. Sage advice relatively recently answered that armor spikes cannot benefit from it because they are not held. As the shield is held, then the corallary of the sage advice implies that yes it should.

 

[FrogReaver]

I believe sage advice said it does. Sage advice relatively recently answered that armor spikes cannot benefit from it because they are not held. As the shield is held, then the corallary of the sage advice implies that yes it should.

So if you attack with a sword and then with a shield on your turn with extra attack then do you get the dueling bonus?

 

[Satyrn]

I mean, I do agree. Maces, clubs, warhammers, shields: they're all distinct things. They're all just different.

Aye. And if I find myself saying that two of those deliver a similar force in a similar way, I'm gonna give them a similar damage die, too.

 

[Mistwell]

So if you attack with a sword and then with a shield on your turn with extra attack then do you get the dueling bonus?

No. The moment you attack with your shield, you're no longer "wielding...no other weapons".

 

[FrogReaver]

I agree with him that the portion of the shield you're hitting the foe with most closely resembles a hit from a club. I think I am the fourth or fifth person in this thread who agrees with him that's one reasonable judgement call. So you calling his decision outlandish? Consider the possibility it's your view that's outside the mainstream on this one.

The rule says:
Often, an Improvised Weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM’s option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus

It’s clearly talking about objects that are physically similar to weapons. Don’t you agree?

 

[Yunru]

The rule says:
Often, an Improvised Weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM’s option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus

It’s clearly talking about objects that are physically similar to weapons. Don’t you agree?

No.

 

[FrogReaver]

No.

Explain how that isn’t clearly talking about an object physically similar to a weapon.

 

[Mistwell]

The rule says:
Often, an Improvised Weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM’s option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus

It’s clearly talking about objects that are physically similar to weapons. Don’t you agree?

No, it is not in my opinion limited to physically similar. I think physically similar is one aspect of similar you can use, but it's not the only one. For exmple if you used an object which looks exactly like a mace but it's made of styrofoam, it's not similar enough to a mace for the purposes of this rule. Because whether or not the object can actually hit with the force of a mace, or with the sharpened points of a mace such that it can puncture in a manner similar to a mace, are also aspects that should be reflected on before deciding if the object is similar enough or not to use a mace as the comparison.

I mean, I understand why you're focused on the physical aspect of a table leg LOOKING like a club, but why are you ignoring that the table leg is also made of wood like the club, and the table leg weighs about what a club would weigh, and a table leg has a blunt striking surface like a clubs striking surface, and all the other similarities between the two? Why are you focused on just the way the objects look to decide they are similar?

 

[Ganymede81]

Aye. And if I find myself saying that two of those deliver a similar force in a similar way, I'm gonna give them a similar damage die, too.

Are you arguing with someone else through me? I don't get this.

 

[Ganymede81]

No, it is not in my opinion limited to physically similar. I think physically similar is one aspect of similar you can use, but it's not the only one. For exmple if you used an object which looks exactly like a mace but it's made of styrofoam, it's not similar enough to a mace for the purposes of this rule.

It looks like you're employing a straw man argument here. Do you honestly believe that by "physically similar" the other poster actually meant "merely look alike?"