Shield Bonus to Touch AC

[nittanytbone]

Shield Ward (PHB2) gives a bonus vs. touch attacks.

Also, couldn't an individual take cover behind his shield? I believe cover boosts your touch AC.

A tower shield can provide +4 cover. I might allow a heavy shield to provide +1 cover, especially if the character was kneeling or prone. Obviously, this takes most of your round.

 

[TarionzCousin]

According to the rules, a shield gives a "shield" bonus to AC, whereas a suit of armor gives an "armor" bonus to AC. Neither bonus to AC is counted vs. a touch attack.

However, I could see a DM house-ruling it that a "shield" bonus counts toward a touch attack, while an "armor" bonus does not, since a shield's function is more to deflect an attack, than it is to absorb it (whereas the function of armor is vice versa).

BTW: In my campaign, to simplify things, I've folded "shield" bonus into "deflection" bonus, thereby getting rid at least one of the named bonuses. So, for example, the AC bonuses for an equipped shield and a Shield of Faith spell do not stack, since both are now considered deflection bonuses. Likewise, a character channot gain the AC bonuses from both his equipped shield and any cover he's positioned behind; instead, he can only gain the higher of the two.

You make too much sense.

Are your house rules posted somewhere? Link?

 

[Infiniti2000]

However, I could see a DM house-ruling it that a "shield" bonus counts toward a touch attack, while an "armor" bonus does not, since a shield's function is more to deflect an attack, than it is to absorb it (whereas the function of armor is vice versa).

Not according to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, not entirely at least. The helm (part of the armor, not part of the shield) is the most obvious example of armor not absorbing blows. In fact, that's built much more for deflection than a shield.

armour
also spelled Armor, also called Body Armour, protective clothing with the ability to deflect or absorb arrows, spears, lances, swords, bullets, or other weapons that may be used against its wearer in combat.

BTW: In my campaign, to simplify things, I've folded "shield" bonus into "deflection" bonus, thereby getting rid at least one of the named bonuses. So, for example, the AC bonuses for an equipped shield and a Shield of Faith spell do not stack, since both are now considered deflection bonuses. Likewise, a character channot gain the AC bonuses from both his equipped shield and any cover he's positioned behind; instead, he can only gain the higher of the two.

I've never had a problem keeping track of deflection bonuses. In fact, I've built quite a lot of characters and monsters and I have yet to get confused over the number of named bonuses. So, I don't see what the problem is that you're fixing here, except to nerf shield of faith, protection from <insert alignment>, and rings of protection.

One more word caution is to make sure you are not actually modifying cover. If you don't get the cover bonus to AC, there are problems. But, anyway, now you're also not allowing shield of faith to stack with standing behind a wall, or blade barrier?

 

[TYPO5478]

Not sure if it's quite related, but I always thought the shield bonus gained from the shield spell should count toward touch attacks since it's not actually connected to your body. I mean, it protects against incorporeal touch attacks, but not corporeal ones? What up wit dat?

 

[billd91]

However, I could see a DM house-ruling it that a "shield" bonus counts toward a touch attack, while an "armor" bonus does not, since a shield's function is more to deflect an attack, than it is to absorb it (whereas the function of armor is vice versa).

That's what I do, though it's not because of any sort of deflection. I just prefer a touch attack to be a bodily touch and not something held. The way I see it, if a shield is a legal target of the touch attack, why not the longspear even if the wielder isn't within your threat range (though the spear is).
I also like the idea of a character hiding behind a shield and having it do something against ray spells.

 

[wildstarsreach]

That's what I do, though it's not because of any sort of deflection. I just prefer a touch attack to be a bodily touch and not something held. The way I see it, if a shield is a legal target of the touch attack, why not the longspear even if the wielder isn't within your threat range (though the spear is).
I also like the idea of a character hiding behind a shield and having it do something against ray spells.

Consider a Paladin taking shield Spec, Shield Ward and Divine shield. Their touch AC becomes formidable.

 

[billd91]

Consider a Paladin taking shield Spec, Shield Ward and Divine shield. Their touch AC becomes formidable.

Well, he's paid for it, hasn't he? Besides, one casting of true strike and it's largely all for naught.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

Funny this should come up now. Just the other night I was designing some magic arms for the PC's to use vs. a red dragon. I decided to let the shield give a bonus to reflex saves and touch AC (but only vs. fire and fire related attacks). Then I started thinking: why shouldn't a shield ALWAYS give a bonus to touch AC?

I think it's a good idea. Definitely adopting it.

Whether or not to then describe it as a 'deflection' bonus is another interesting point. ANd one I think I might adopt. Not particularly worried about 'nerfing' shield of faith. Perfectly OK in my book to let spells and stuff overlap in function. After all the spell can be used while leaving 2 hands free. Or when you don't have a shield. Still plenty of bonus for the spell.

As for reasons why this should be so: well it strikes me as much more realistic. Also there are some highly dangerous ray spells out there. Thinking of the 2nd level necromancer spell, can't think of its name, but if it hits it drains levels, no save. PLus as we all know the shield is in danger of extinction in many games.

 

[Zurai]

(After looking in the PHB2). Shield Specialization doesn't affect Touch AC. It only improves your Shield bonus, which is not useful vs. Touch Attacks.
"When you are the target of a touch attack, your AC doesn’t include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus." http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatStatistics.htm#touchAttacks

There was an "and" in there. Shield Specialization is a pre-requisite for Shield Ward. And, once you have Shield Ward, Shield Specialization does affect Touch AC - it adds 1 to your Shield AC Bonus, which then adds 1 to your Touch AC.

 

[blargney the second]

Parrying Shield is in Lords of Madness, p.181. Add your shield bonus to touch AC, prereq shield proficiency, fighter bonus featable.
-blarg