PDA

View Full Version : [Feat] Shield Block



Matthew
2007-05-11, 02:54 PM
Okay, so almost every fix for Weapon and Shield Fighters tends to boil down to increasing AC and there have been some really interesting ones. The remaining suggestions encompass the Active Defence variant or Opposed Attack Rolls. I think I have thought of a simpler solution (maybe even a better one). How about if we take the Feat Block Arrow and give it a cousin that blocks one Melee Attack per turn (not for Bucklers or Animated Shields). At first it seemed brokenly powerful to me, but the more I thought about it, the more it appealed. Finally, a reason to use a Shield past Level 3, surely?
I am thinking about how exactly to word the Feat (on the pattern of Block Arrow), but also looking for criticism as to why it would be too much or why it doesn't go far enough.

brian c
2007-05-11, 04:13 PM
Do you mean Deflect Arrows? I'd say that could be slightly overpowered if you do it like 3.5 Deflect Arrows and make it automatic, but if you get a reflex save like in 3.0 Deflect Arrows it could be alright.

Lord Iames Osari
2007-05-11, 04:17 PM
No, he means Block Arrow (http://realmshelps.dandello.net/cgi-bin/feats.pl?Block_Arrow,HB).

Matthew
2007-05-11, 04:59 PM
Indeed, Block Arrow, which is another version of Deflect Arrow.

Shield Block would automatically Block one Melee Attack per turn. It would certainly make it interesting as to whether a Character chooses Weapon and Shield, Two Weapon Fighting or Two Handed Fighting.

Lord Iames Osari
2007-05-11, 05:09 PM
I think it's a good idea.

brian c
2007-05-11, 05:58 PM
Indeed, Block Arrow, which is another version of Deflect Arrow.

Shield Block would automatically Block one Melee Attack per turn. It would certainly make it interesting as to whether a Character chooses Weapon and Shield, Two Weapon Fighting or Two Handed Fighting.

Ah, okay, I never paid much attention to HoB. It's the same thing as Deflect Arrows, just with a shield instead of unarmed. The only drawback I see to this is that at any level if you face one enemy who lacks iterative attacks, you're completely invulnerable.

Matthew
2007-05-11, 06:11 PM
Heh, not really. Anyone can Two Weapon Fight, even without the Feat! You are invulnerable to Charges and Standard Attacks, though... more than one guy would change that.

Dryad
2007-05-11, 09:38 PM
Yeah... The first five levels you'll be nigh invincible with that feat..

But shield fighters aren't just defensive.
Improved Shield Bash, Shield Charge, two weapon fighting and using shield spikes can make up a lot.
Say you're a fighter in a chainshirt and a heavy shield and longsword. Human, first level. With these three feats. Sure, you'll need a dex 15+, which is nasty, but you don't need that much of a con score, because your AC is, and will be, a lot better. Now; at first level, given strength 14, you'll have two attacks per round, or one, as you choose. +1 for two attacks or +3 for one attack. Your shield deals what; 1d6 points of damage? Your longsword 1d8. You'ge got shield charge. You charge, opening with a stunning two attacks, both +3, if I'm not mistaken. And your AC drops to 17 from 19. Because you've charged. In your next turn, you still get two attacks, but are at AC 19.
You can eventually build up a defensive fighter with tricks like improved trip and the like, using her shield both as a means of defence, but as affectively offensive, and as devastating, as any two-weapon wielder would with swords, axes or maces.

Erk
2007-05-12, 02:23 AM
yeah, a lot of complainants of "sword-and-board" don't consider the fact that, even in real life (which I fully admit D&D does not remotely resemble), shields are weapons as well as defensive items. Two-weapon-fighting techniques and sword-and-board are not mutually exclusive; a good shield fighter should be taking feats that help him whack opponents with his shield and do a good job of it.

But we do need more sword-and-shield fighting feats, just as we need more fighting feats of all kinds. I like this idea, but perhaps it should be limited or unavailable at lower levels, to prevent a fighter with a shield from being essentially unhittable in one-on-one combat at lower levels? This is mostly a nitpick since such situations come up rarely and can still be circumvented (eg. by opponent then drawing a spare dagger so he gets two attacks instead of one)

Matthew
2007-05-14, 07:21 PM
Heh, the Forum has gone Shield mad since I posted this. Oh well, everyone has their own solutions...

Dryad: Yep, the Character will be near invulnerable to single opponents at Levels 1-5 with this Feat, though as I pointed out anybody can Two Weapon fight to overcome this problem (and often NPCs need to roll very high to hit this sort of Character anyway). However, chances are a Fighter won't be facing single opponents at this time and the idea was to make Shields considerably more powerful than they currently are (i.e. make them as desirable as Two Handed Fighting or Two Weapon Fighting) and I think this Feat accomplishes that. Is it too powerful? Possibly, but possibly not. I guess only Maths and playtesting can solve that problem!

Aggressive Shield Fighters suck, and with good reason. The Feat investment is staggering and it only works during a Full Round Attack. Not to mention the penalties are very bad at Low Levels and Weapon Focus doesn't apply to both weapon and shield. Of course, that's another area of discussion...

Erk: Yep, Shields were both offensive and defensive historically (as far as we can tell) and D&D does do a poor job of modelling that. even if it did a great job, though, it wouldn't be as good as Two Weapon Fighting or, in particular, Two Handed Fighting. Shields used offensively should open up potential for Attack. If we modelled this on the usual thinking regarding the Roman Scutum (Heavy Shield), a successful blow with the Scutum should probably force the victim to save against a 'Daze' effect, which can then be followed up with via the Gladius (Short Sword).

I am glad to hear you feel positively about this Feat, and I agree it may be too powerful at Low Levels (1-5), but I'm undecided. At the moment I am inclined to make it available at Base Attack Bonus 1, but probably because these are the Levels at which the Character is most likely to encounter numerous low powered foes anyway.

PlasticSoldier
2007-05-14, 07:33 PM
What would happen if you tried to stop a +40 magic mace of magic with a Wooden shield of bad luck because in real life your shield wood be knocked out of the way and you'd fall down or something.

P.s. i know i made that up but it's just hyperbole

Charity
2007-05-14, 07:49 PM
What would happen if you tried to stop a +40 magic mace of magic with a Wooden shield of bad luck because in real life your shield wood be knocked out of the way and you'd fall down or something.

P.s. i know i made that up but it's just hyperbole

Emphasis mine
Er in real life I fear neither, a +40 (or indeed + anything) mace nor a shield of bad luck exist, sorry to be the one to break this to you.

And your mum is the one who has been swapping your milk teeth for cash.

I think this is the sort of feat that might make me use a sheild, which probably means that it is fairly balanced in my mind at least.

In order to balance it out at low levels you could give it the same minus as fighting defensively, which would hurt much more at low level.. or maybe make them swap an attack for that auto block... though that would make it too weak... so maybe not.

Matthew
2007-05-15, 11:12 PM
PlasticSoldier: Heh. Indeed. If such a situation were to come up it would be strictly outside the bounds of what the D&D rules currently govern. In short, it would be up to your DM, as it would in any similar situation.

Charity: Music to my ears, the very intention of the Feat. I'm undecided whether to impose any penalties. In bygone days this would have been part of an Opposed Roll of some kind, but 3.5 has rolled right over that with the Deflect Arrows revision and Arrow Block Feat.
I'm trying to conceive how this would play out in large scale combat. A Phalanx of Hobgoblins all with the Shield Block Feat could really ruin a Fighter's day and make him even less useful than the Fireballing Wizard... hard to say.

Human Paragon 3
2007-05-16, 10:53 AM
There are other ways around the shield block, even at low levels.

Power attack feat string? Sunder the shield. Shield wielder is now boned.

Expertise string? Dissarm the fighter of his shield. Shield wielder is now boned.

Shoot him with arrows, since he doesn't have Block Arrow (unless he does...)

Or just surround him with tons of low-level kobolds.

Should be balanced, the DM will just need to take precaucions to keep things interesting, which is the same with TWF and THF.

Matthew
2007-05-20, 07:06 PM
Indeed, good points all. I have to say, I feel inclined to combine Block Arrow with this Feat. It's weaknesses are already fairly apparent (Sunder, Multiple Enemies).

AngelAndrius
2007-05-20, 07:19 PM
hmmm i'm inclined to limit the feat a tad, i would probably make the ability of the fighter to block a melee attack up to the fighter, and should she choose to block, I would impose the two weapon fighting penalties for her next attacks and an additional -2/-2(4?) if they choose to two weapon attack on top of the block.

I dunno, but i'm also inclined to limit DA a bit, but you have to remember, deflect arrow only works on small projectiles, not boulders. Would the shield block feat allow you to block the pixie as well as the Storm Giant with equal ease? that in itself might make it too powerful.

Matthew
2007-05-20, 07:28 PM
hmmm i'm inclined to limit the feat a tad, i would probably make the ability of the fighter to block a melee attack up to the fighter, and should she choose to block, I would impose the two weapon fighting penalties for her next attacks and an additional -2/-2(4?) if they choose to two weapon attack on top of the block.

Not sure I understand this part. it would already be up to the Characetr whether they blocked or not. I don't think I would impose penalties, it's just too cumbersome a mechanic, as this feat doesn't interfere with the Characters ability to two weapon fight and shouldn't be if it is to allow Shield users to compete with Power Attack.


I dunno, but i'm also inclined to limit DA a bit, but you have to remember, deflect arrow only works on small projectiles, not boulders. Would the shield block feat allow you to block the pixie as well as the Storm Giant with equal ease? that in itself might make it too powerful.

A very good point. Either this is going to have the same limitation as with Block Arrow (no boulders) or look into Ranged Sundering.