Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Any D&D/D20

Shadowrun

World of Darkness

Palladium

Other (feel free to post about it)

[pikachu17]

Yeah, its pretty damn bad Munchkinry to say wielding a shield is not using it as armor. It specifically says "wielding a shield increases your Armor Class by 2."

Persus, what benefit would Captain Faerun get from the Tavern Brawler feat? Keep in mind that it only allows a bonus action grapple on a 1d4+Str damage hit. I'm pretty sure if you're going for a grappler, there's better things to do than wear a shield.
And, yeah, I agree that actually making him a class that's supposed to be strong would be best, and those have shield proficiency anyway.

[Kagus]

To quote a user on a different forum:

I think RAW and RAI are insufficient to describe this situation. It's more a case of RAITDRTVHABTST: Read As If They Didn't Really Think Very Hard About This Specific Thing...

As for building a grappler, a shield is actually just about the best thing you can have, strictly because of Shield Master's bonus action shove. Grappler as a feat is highly disappointing, and Tavern Brawler is similarly a bit lackluster. And the two feats don't play well together, since both Tavern Brawler's grapple and Shield Master's shove require the bonus action.

Also worth remembering that this isn't 3.5, and feat slots are extremely fucking pricey...

[pikachu17]

Yes, but is the shield worth having no weapon other than unarmed strikes?

[Kagus]

Having a shield means you can, in one turn, take a single opponent and:

Immobilize them
Render them prone, providing disadvantage on all their attacks and advantage on all attacks against them
Prevent them from getting back up


Damage at that point is just icing, they're already taken out of the fight. You can also drag them around if you want to do that. There's not much they can do even if they do succeed at breaking your hold while lying down, since they still need to stand up before they can move anywhere.

[Grim Portent]

Having a shield means you can, in one turn, take a single opponent and:

Immobilize them
Render them prone, providing disadvantage on all their attacks and advantage on all attacks against them
Prevent them from getting back up


Damage at that point is just icing, they're already taken out of the fight. You can also drag them around if you want to do that. There's not much they can do even if they do succeed at breaking your hold while lying down, since they still need to stand up before they can move anywhere.

Anyone with 2 attacks can do that, extra attacks can be split between shoves and grapples, so you can grapple someone on one attack, then shove them prone with the other.

Generally speaking the perfect grappler would be a strength based monk, so probably a tortle, who either dips into rogue for expertise or takes the UA feat for Athletics expertise. Fixed AC 17 lets them dump dex to focus on strength, and they get a BA attack and Extra Attack at the same time so they can bully people. Grapple, shove prone, then boot the boot in.

[Persus13]

Another good grapple build is a Barb/Rogue MC.

The difference between wear and wield is the sort of thing that only matters for builds on paper, because if you try to bring that logic to your table, you're just going to get laughed at.

As for building a grappler, a shield is actually just about the best thing you can have, strictly because of Shield Master's bonus action shove. Grappler as a feat is highly disappointing, and Tavern Brawler is similarly a bit lackluster. And the two feats don't play well together, since both Tavern Brawler's grapple and Shield Master's shove require the bonus action.

Also worth remembering that this isn't 3.5, and feat slots are extremely fucking pricey...

Having both Shield Master and Tavern Brawler gives you more options, which isn't a bad thing. Or you can skip Shield Master entirely and just go Battlemaster with Trip Attack. Although if I played Captain Faerun, I'd pick it up later for the other two benefits of the feat, which are the real reason to get it. As for feats being pricey, that's another reason to go Fighter and/or Variant Human.

Yeah, its pretty damn bad Munchkinry to say wielding a shield is not using it as armor. It specifically says "wielding a shield increases your Armor Class by 2."

Persus, what benefit would Captain Faerun get from the Tavern Brawler feat? Keep in mind that it only allows a bonus action grapple on a 1d4+Str damage hit. I'm pretty sure if you're going for a grappler, there's better things to do than wear a shield.
And, yeah, I agree that actually making him a class that's supposed to be strong would be best, and those have shield proficiency anyway.

Tavern Brawler is mainly for proficiency with improvised weapons. And since anyone calling themselves Captain Faerun should be using their shield as a frisbee/improvised weapon, that's pretty useful to have unless your DM allows your shield to be considered something else.

Damage at that point is just icing, they're already taken out of the fight.

Until you start fighting spellcasters, that is.

[Cthulhu]

'monks can use a shield as long as they're not holding it like a frisbee' is the author's intent

Except they can't, because that would be wearing armor. We've already established that a shield is armor, so wearing a shield would be wearing armor. Therefore, the distinction in that passage between wearing armor and wielding a shield makes it clear that this is a case of holding shields like a goddamn frisbee.

what no

The distinction is there because a shield is not armor.  Every reference to armor and shields describes them separately.  If you're gonna come up with weird rules-lawyery netbuilds, at least make them based on real rules.  There's no distinction between "wear" and "wield" a shield, you can't use it like a frisbee to do shield maneuvers.

THis would all be solved if we stopped playing modern D&D.

[Mephisto]

THis would all be solved if we stopped playing modern D&D.

[MrRoboto75]

would it though

[Kagus]

'monks can use a shield as long as they're not holding it like a frisbee' is the author's intent

Except they can't, because that would be wearing armor. We've already established that a shield is armor, so wearing a shield would be wearing armor. Therefore, the distinction in that passage between wearing armor and wielding a shield makes it clear that this is a case of holding shields like a goddamn frisbee.

what no

The distinction is there because a shield is not armor.  Every reference to armor and shields describes them separately.  If you're gonna come up with weird rules-lawyery netbuilds, at least make them based on real rules.  There's no distinction between "wear" and "wield" a shield, you can't use it like a frisbee to do shield maneuvers.

THis would all be solved if we stopped playing modern D&D.

Well alright then; in that case there's no penalty to using a shield without proficiency at all. The section on Armor Proficiency specifically states "If you wear armor that you lack proficiency with, you have disadvantage [...]", which by your statement would mean that there's no such penalty for using a shield, since it's not armor (the comment at the beginning of the section about "strapping a shield to their arm" would I suppose just be a red herring in that case). Shields aren't separately referred to in that clause.

This would all be solved if people could write rules with consistent and sensible language.

The difference between wear and wield is the sort of thing that only matters for builds on paper, because if you try to bring that logic to your table, you're just going to get laughed at.

Yup, that's the point!

[scriver]

And we're not even getting into how you can technically shield yourself metaphorically with other objects than shields. Who says that the shield you wield to shield yourself has to be a shield? It could be anything. Even a dagger. Or a sword!

[wierd]

Half-open door is one of my favorites.

(fond memories of dungeon master, and slamming doors shut after throwing a huge fireball through it)

[Cruxador]

Not related to y'all's topic but I just got into a pathfinder game with my usual group and I wound up so far down the character building rabbit hole. It's like when I used to read 3.5 splats cover to cover back in high school.

[MrRoboto75]

Not related to y'all's topic but I just got into a pathfinder game with my usual group and I wound up so far down the character building rabbit hole. It's like when I used to read 3.5 splats cover to cover back in high school.

Char gen taking a day is why I'll never look forward to returning to 3.5

[wierd]

I have contemplated making an automated script to facilitate the process.

The problem is all those damn min-maxxers, and their use of the most obscure shit in splat books. That complicates the core mechanic terribly. Adding all the necessary knobs and buttons to allow for all that ends up making the char-generator into a clusterfuck.

If you ask me, it kinda defeats the purpose of chargen and the use of random rolls, if you are gonna allow a player to get their fantasy dream character anyway (which is what a consummate min-maxxer will do, no matter what. They will twist and poke until they get their way.)