Tower Shield Use?

[TheCrowing1432]

SO I had this idea of a sort of an armored juggernaut who is a terror to his enemies, but a bastion of defense for his allies.

So I was thinking "Paladin with a Tower Shield"

Now Tower Shields are unwieldy, but are there ways to make them effective?

[Karl Aegis]

Tower shields can give you total cover making you immune to mundane assault, but you can't attack on a turn the tower shield gives you total cover. This shifts most of the risk of being attacked onto your allies. You're free to cast spells behind your shield and are still vulnerable to attacks by spells. For a paladin with a tower shield you pretty much do nothing the entire game and laugh as your allies all get slaughtered without you.

[Rubik]

You get nearly as much protection from a heavy shield, without nearly the penalties for using one, and wasting your turn for cover is pretty much never worth it unless you have nothing else to do for that round.

Tower shields are basically useless unless you exploit the use-tower-shield-for-cover-to-hide-behind-which-includes-your-tower-shield glitch. Or unless you use a small darkwood tower shield combined with an unseen servant in order to give you cover without having to wield it yourself. Or, I suppose, a hireling/cohort/summons that wouldn't be of much use anyway for strategic cover.

Basically what I'm saying is that, unless you cheat, you never want to wield one yourself.

[TheCrowing1432]

Oh, heavy shield it is then.

Im kind of surprised on how useless the tower shield is.

[WeaselGuy]

About the only scenario in which it wouldn't be completely useless is if you have enough people carrying them to form a phalanx, and have other people behind that shield wall attacking around the shield bearers with longspears. Classic Roman battle tactic, but like I said, you need so many people carrying them to make it worth it (probably through Leadership or minionmancy), that by the time you can pull it off a single fireball will decimate your followers.

[Seharvepernfan]

It's not as useless as all that. It's just that it's uses are situational. In a 5ft wide hallway, enemies are gonna have a real hard time getting past you; they'll pretty much have to bullrush/overrun/sunder. If you need to approach a defended place (like a tower) where people are shooting at you, it's a nice thing to have. It can totally block a gaze attack or breath weapon. If you're using divine magic or are using wands/staves to attack with (or stilled spells), it's better than a heavy shield. If you use the FAQ interpretation of the total cover option, you pick one side of your square to grant total cover, and can still make AoO's against anyone not likewise granted cover from you. I'm sure theres tons more uses for them, but people never want to delve into them, because everybody is so deadset on thinking that they suck.

They'd be a lot better if you didn't have to dedicate a standard action to getting the total cover. A move action would be more appropriate, I think.

Anyway, the main reason you don't want to use one is that paladins aren't proficient.

[Coidzor]

Anyway, the main reason you don't want to use one is that paladins aren't proficient.

Yeah, that's a pretty hefty ACP to eat on everything, including attacks, plus the -2 from using a tower shield and a weapon to begin with.


edit: would that be too good for a feat? Shrinking the action from standard to move?

Honestly I'd say just change that to a benefit of proficiency. I think I'll add that into my set of houserules, actually.

[Darrin]

There's an optional rule in Races of Stone that lets you swap Tower Shield Proficiency for an Exotic Shield Proficiency. So if you're not going to do any shield bashing, might as well pick up an Extreme Shield.