Shield cover bonus
- Thread starter DanMcS
- Start date
Fenris said:
Shields provide a cover bonus equivalent to their listed AC bonus. A large shield (+2 AC) is equivalent to 1/4 cover, and thus provides a +1 bonus to reflex saves when it is being wielded. Shields that provide only a +1 are too small to give a reflex save bonus (equivalent to the new 1/10 cover category, which might include something like a barstool being in the way). You lose your shield cover bonus when denied your DEX bonus to AC.
Shields stack with armor, being different named bonuses now, but not with other cover, like a wall or the shield spell, unless the DM is willing to adjudicate adding cover, ie a large shield (1/4 cover) and a waist-high wall (1/2) might provide 3/4 cover if the DM is willing.
***
Relevant rules if you want to track shields being damaged:
If an attack misses by the appropriate amount (2 points for a large shield), it deals damage to the shield.
Buckler: harness 10, 5 hp.
Small wooden shield: hardness 5, 10 hp.
Large wooden shield: hardness 5, 15 hp.
Small steel shield: hardness 10, 10 hp.
Large steel shield: hardness 10, 20 hp.
Immunities:
Inanimate objects are immune to critical hits. Objects are immune to subdual damage. Animated objects are immune to critical hits because they are constructs.
Ranged Weapon Damage:
Objects take half damage from ranged weapons (except for damage from siege engines and the like). Divide the damage by 2 before applying the object's hardness.
Energy Attacks:
Objects take half damage from acid, fire, and lightning attacks. Divide the damage by 2 before applying the hardness. Cold attacks deal one- quarter damage to objects. Sonic attacks deal full damage to objects.
Ineffective Weapons:
The DM may determine that certain weapons just can't deal damage effectively to certain objects. For example, a combatant will have a hard time chopping down a door by shooting arrows at it or cutting a rope with a club.
Magic Shields:
The attacker cannot damage a magic shield that has an enhancement bonus unless his own weapon has at least as high an enhancement bonus as the shield struck. Each +1 of enhancement bonus also adds 1 to the shield's hardness and hit points. If a combatant's shield has a +2 enhancement bonus, a combatant add 2 to its hardness and to its hit points.
Last edited:
Spatzimaus
First Post
He left out the part where I said "You lose your shield cover bonus when denied your DEX bonus to AC". That helps balance it a bit.
MarauderX
Explorer
Should a shield be considered a cover bonus?
Nope. As long as it is attached to a character's arm, back, tentacle, whatever, it should be just the AC bonus. It's used as AC for a reason - it is mobile and can be struck out of the way by one opponent as another attacks, it can be used by the defender to deflect blows, bash somebody in the face with, etc.
My arguement against cover is that a fighter would have to define which way her shield was facing in order to define which of the two flanking archers had the cover penalty and which didn't. In that way alone it becomes a big mess with game fluidity, as the shielded PCs try to get cover from both archers somehow. Then try to keep track of it as a DM... no way.
If a character plants a shield on top of a half-wall while ducting down behind a shield, then I would stack the AC bonus and the cover bonuses, as it should be. Just because there is a shield doesn't mean that an arrow can't penetrate through it to strike a character's arm for damage, so the shield as cover is a moot point IMO.
Nope. As long as it is attached to a character's arm, back, tentacle, whatever, it should be just the AC bonus. It's used as AC for a reason - it is mobile and can be struck out of the way by one opponent as another attacks, it can be used by the defender to deflect blows, bash somebody in the face with, etc.
My arguement against cover is that a fighter would have to define which way her shield was facing in order to define which of the two flanking archers had the cover penalty and which didn't. In that way alone it becomes a big mess with game fluidity, as the shielded PCs try to get cover from both archers somehow. Then try to keep track of it as a DM... no way.
If a character plants a shield on top of a half-wall while ducting down behind a shield, then I would stack the AC bonus and the cover bonuses, as it should be. Just because there is a shield doesn't mean that an arrow can't penetrate through it to strike a character's arm for damage, so the shield as cover is a moot point IMO.
zero skill LPB
First Post
Cool! I like it!
And good to hear that others have actual playtest experience with this rule in use (thanks, Spazman).
Marauder-dude, given that 3.5 is doing away with facing do you think you can envision a non-flatfooted shield-bearer spinning just-in-time to bring that shield to plink both archers' arrows?
Could be worse, could be hasted.
And good to hear that others have actual playtest experience with this rule in use (thanks, Spazman).
Marauder-dude, given that 3.5 is doing away with facing do you think you can envision a non-flatfooted shield-bearer spinning just-in-time to bring that shield to plink both archers' arrows?
Could be worse, could be hasted.
Similar Threads
Level Up (A5E)
What would you do to simplify A5E and/or speed up combat?
