D&D 5E Shield Saltiness

[CleverNickName]

The rules are pretty clear about donning and doffing a shield. The DM can house-rule it, but I don't think the player has a leg to stand on here.

However, the rules are deliberately vague about what is and is not "appropriate in a civilized town" or whatever. And rightly so! Not every city is the same. Sure, in a wealthy and peaceful city (like a hobbit shire), wearing armor or carrying a shield outside of a military parade would look very out-of-place, even threatening. But in a city with a warlike culture or a proud military tradition (dwarven clanholds, for example), carrying a shield around town might not be a problem...in fact, it might be considered proper attire for formal occasions and you could get kicked out for not wearing a shield.

My advice: stick to the rules as written as far as the action economy is concerned, then have a long chat with your DM about the cultural expectations in the campaign.

 

[tetrasodium]

I’ve watched the video. As I said the knights with straps pictured are holding them with a hand. Can you explain how that supports an argument that they can be used on your arm? I think we were all aware that shields had straps to start with.

View attachment 129884
View attachment 129885

he goes into that in the video. I think it's more relevant fr the fact that 5e' action economy is so crude & leans so heavily into ""you can do it free as part of your action"while discounting the presence of a barbarian carrying a greatsword akin to the gravy seals carrying an assault rifle in a park walmart or grocery store while in ravenloft.

 

[shadowoflameth]

Agree that the rule is clear. It's an action to equip a shield. He could draw a weapon as part to the same action. As to if it's appropriate behavior in the town; that's a matter of the setting and role play, not rules. If the party understands that in this town we keep our shield on our backs or on the horse, unless we're trying to start a fight, then no problem. If there's a reason to do it anyway, they can do it anyway. I wouldn't worry about historical accuracy unless you are trying to play in an historically accurate medieval setting. You are likely playing D&D in a magical fantasy world that isn't real, and therefore you have license to play as you like.

 

[Mistwell]

It's Curse of Strahd, half the population is probably werewolves and the trees can kill you. The town guards are probably vampires.

That's not a fair characterization. Some are other types of undead. Or ravens. Might be a couple of demons in there too. A few might be perfectly normal humanoids possessed by an evil artifact too.

 

[Quartz]

The texts demonstrate that do they? I’m a history degree student. I’ll believe it when I see the source. I’m not saying at some point in history there weren’t warriors swinging shields in arcs by their necks like hoola hoops. I’m skeptical though. Particularly as looking at the pictures the majority of them are holding their shields firmly in their hands... yes even the ones with straps over their shoulder. The only images of knights dueling with a shield have them slung over their shoulders not their arms. I have a real issue when a person with a play on the word university in his thread and claiming to be studying history doesn’t provide references.

The shield is held on the back by a loop and swung forward so it can be held by the hand.

 

[Mistwell]

Incidentally if this town mentioned is Vallaki I can absolutely understand the guards/authorities harassing anyone looking particularly armed for combat. Perhaps the player isn’t aware of the subtext of the town..

I agree. It's also the town I think players are most likely to get in a fight with the town guards. Perhaps justifiably so.

I know our group...did not leave Vallaki on good terms.

There might have been a few buildings on fire too.

 

[MGibster]

I've thought borrowing a page from some computer games. In scenes where there's no fighting, sometimes the PC is running around in regular clothes only donning armor when they're about to fight. Why not do that? You don't wear armor when you're going out to get a mug of ale and I won't throw any major combat encounters at you.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

At the risk of annoying the people who do not like realism, or like to handwave everything, it depends on the type of shield. Is it a smaller shield that just has hand grips and maybe a loop to slip your arm through? Or is it a larger shield that needs to be strapped to your arm to be used effectively?

 

[Mannahnin]

In all my years of playing D&D, PCs have pretty much worn their armor and carried their weapons wherever they go. It's not particularly realistic but I consider it one of the many oddities that makes D&D D&D.

Yup. It's an example of how the default expectations of D&D are more of an American cowboy movie Wild West-style civilization (with the PCs as gunslingers, naturally) than a historical medieval society. Periodically folks with a good understanding of medieval history point out that wandering around town with weapons would never pass there unless you were part of the guard or in the middle of a battle or raid by brigands, but the "generic fantasyland" cultural construct we've developed thanks to D&D and the computer games it's spawned is more akin to that Wild West.

 

[TheSword]

he goes into that in the video. I think it's more relevant fr the fact that 5e' action economy is so crude & leans so heavily into ""you can do it free as part of your action"while discounting the presence of a barbarian carrying a greatsword akin to the gravy seals carrying an assault rifle in a park walmart or grocery store while in ravenloft.

Maybe you just don’t know the context of Vallaki so well Read the book. It makes perfect sense.