Dropping Shields: How do you play it?

[Aelyn]

So I'm DMing for my group at the moment, and a question's come up about shields. As far as I can see, the RAW is that the only way for someone to go from using a shield to not using it is to spend an action Doffing it.

However, my group argues that it should be possible to drop a shield as a free action, as even with a second strap it shouldn't be that tough to take it off. Similarly, I think it makes sense that you should be able to Disarm a shield, but I find it difficult to reconcile that with requiring the full action to voluntarily take it off.

So my question is simple: Does anyone here play shields as being droppable / Disarm able, and if so, how does it play in practice?

[Kryx]

I did find a tweet implying that it is an action: https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/487278064812818432

Disarming would probably breaks any straps, that's why it would work imo.

I run with action to don and action to doff. I could see an argument for bonus action to doff, but not sure I'd go with it.

[Madeiner]

I'm using no action to drop a shield, but it's a remnant of 3.5.

Might also be explained around the "interact with one item" free action that you get each round.
I don't normally bother about sheating or interacting with weapons on characters, because my players find it boring.
I just have one simple houserule: it's a bonus action to exchange the weapon(s) you are wielding with another.
So, as a bonus action, you could stow away a shield and a longsword and take out a longbow.
I know it's quite an houserule, but it's simple, and i get to avoid having "dead" rounds were people just switch weapons.

[Joe the Rat]

By rules, it's an action to don or doff. It's right on the armor table. That's the rules reason it doesn't fall under "free interaction with an item" category.
It's also how Adventurer's League games roll.



I run with action to don and action to doff. I could see an argument for bonus action to doff, but not sure I'd go with it.

Bonus action shield removal was something I hadn't considered before. It seems like the sort of thing that would fit under the Use Object portion of Cunning Action, or would be a good add on to Shield Master, were it not for them already having three benefits (Feats seem to be built under Rule of Three).

[Aetol]

IMO it depends on what shield you use.
- If your shield has a strap (http://s905.photobucket.com/user/HobieMods/media/Captain%20America%20WIPs/MovieHeaterShieldBack.jpg.html) it can't be disarmed, but you need an action to take it off.
- If your shield has just a grip (http://www.larp.com/midgard/shield3.jpg) you can drop it as a "interact with an item" free action, but it can be disarmed. Stowing it still takes an action.

[Malifice]

Your one free object interaction or otherwise an action to equip.

Can be disarmed.

[Kryx]

By rules, it's an action to don or doff. It's right on the armor table.
Nice! I forgot about that. It does indeed say it there now that you mention it.

[Malifice]

By rules, it's an action to don or doff. It's right on the armor table. That's the rules reason it doesn't fall under "free interaction with an item" category.

Ah thanks. Good spot.

[Aelyn]

By rules, it's an action to don or doff. It's right on the armor table. That's the rules reason it doesn't fall under "free interaction with an item" category.

True, and as I say I accept that's the only RAW way I can see to remove it, but playing devil's advocate: a shield isn't worn in the same way armour is, and it could be argued that doffing the shield is removing it and putting it away, eg hanging it on your pack. Is there any particular reason that doffing should be the only way to remove a shield?

For the record, when I refer to disarming a shield, I am referring to the Battle Master trait.

[Ninja_Prawn]

I'm usually a big fan of sticking with the RAW, but for me, this is an exception. I rule: action to stow/equip, free object interaction to drop, same as for weapons. To me, a medieval shield has more in common with a weapon than an item of armour.

[coredump]

A 'strapped' shield does not mean it is snug on the arm. Google "back of shield" and it becomes obvious that most strapped shields just slip onto the arm, and would be very simple to drop to the ground.

And this doesn't even account for all of the shields that only have a single grip. (ala Vikings)

So it is perfectly reasonable to declare that you could drop the shield as a free object interaction, and that 'doffing' a shield is like 'sheathing' a sword; meaning you put it away.

That said.... what is and isn't allowed as a 'free object interaction' is clearly based partly on what is 'reasonable' and partly on game balance. You can't draw 2 daggers, but you can reach behind you to find a potion out of your backpack....


I don't think I would allow a disarm if there was a 'generic' disarm ability. But I might for a BattleMaster.

[Ruslan]

So I'm DMing for my group at the moment, and a question's come up about shields. As far as I can see, the RAW is that the only way for someone to go from using a shield to not using it is to spend an action Doffing it.

However, my group argues that it should be possible to drop a shield as a free action, as even with a second strap it shouldn't be that tough to take it off. Similarly, I think it makes sense that you should be able to Disarm a shield, but I find it difficult to reconcile that with requiring the full action to voluntarily take it off.

So my question is simple: Does anyone here play shields as being droppable / Disarm able, and if so, how does it play in practice?

Our group plays with the interpretation is that it costs an Action to properly stow a shield (eg. by slinging it across your back), but merely dropping it on the ground should be free.

[JAL_1138]

it could be argued that doffing the shield is removing it and putting it away, eg hanging it on your pack

You're not hanging it on your pack when you doff it; you're just taking it off. "Doff" isn't a technique or particular series of actions, just a word that means "taking off something you're wearing." It's literally exactly the same as if they'd said "take off." You're asking if there's another way to take off a shield besides taking it off. They just used an old-timey word for it.

It takes an action to take a shield off because 5e only includes the types of middle-sized shields that had a forearm strap.

[Cybren]

IMO it depends on what shield you use.
- If your shield has a strap (http://s905.photobucket.com/user/HobieMods/media/Captain%20America%20WIPs/MovieHeaterShieldBack.jpg.html) it can't be disarmed, but you need an action to take it off.
- If your shield has just a grip (http://www.larp.com/midgard/shield3.jpg) you can drop it as a "interact with an item" free action, but it can be disarmed. Stowing it still takes an action.

That's for the most part the difference between a shield and a buckler, correct? Though, as usual, D&D did it wrong, and backwards, since at least in 3.5 'shields' were defined as gripped in the fist and bucklers as worn on a strap.

[Joe the Rat]

True, and as I say I accept that's the only RAW way I can see to remove it, but playing devil's advocate: a shield isn't worn in the same way armour is, and it could be argued that doffing the shield is removing it and putting it away, eg hanging it on your pack. Is there any particular reason that doffing should be the only way to remove a shield?

For the record, when I refer to disarming a shield, I am referring to the Battle Master trait.


You're not hanging it on your pack when you doff it; you're just taking it off. "Doff" isn't a technique or particular series of actions, just a word that means "taking off something you're wearing." It's literally exactly the same as if they'd said "take off." You're asking if there's another way to take off a shield besides taking it off. They just used an old-timey word for it.

It takes an action to take a shield off because 5e only includes the types of middle-sized shields that had a forearm strap.

Home game, I'd probably let someone ditch their shield (in the off arm, not hung/slung sense) as a bonus action, or as a replacement for an attack with Extra Attack, but we tend to run more towards rule of cool. That and I accept strapless shields (the single handle rounds, and actual bucklers) as valid descriptions for shields.

Hadn't thought about Battlemasters disarming shields. I'd consider it.

Combining the two points, You could made this dependent on how your shield is rigged. Strapped: takes an action to doff, cannot be disarmed. No Strap: free action to drop, but can be disarmed. There may be other benefits or hindrances to each mode if this needs further balancing.

[Aetol]

That's for the most part the difference between a shield and a buckler, correct? Though, as usual, D&D did it wrong, and backwards, since at least in 3.5 'shields' were defined as gripped in the fist and bucklers as worn on a strap.

I suppose buckler can't have straps (too small, and that's not how you use a buckler anyway), but full-sized shields could have a simple grip too, as in the picture I linked.

[Vogonjeltz]

So I'm DMing for my group at the moment, and a question's come up about shields. As far as I can see, the RAW is that the only way for someone to go from using a shield to not using it is to spend an action Doffing it.

However, my group argues that it should be possible to drop a shield as a free action, as even with a second strap it shouldn't be that tough to take it off. Similarly, I think it makes sense that you should be able to Disarm a shield, but I find it difficult to reconcile that with requiring the full action to voluntarily take it off.

So my question is simple: Does anyone here play shields as being droppable / Disarm able, and if so, how does it play in practice?

From the PHB page 146 titled Getting Into and Out of Armor

"Doff. This is the time it takes to take off armor. If you have help, reduce this time by half."

Shield is listed as 1 action for both don and doff.

I can find no action cost for removing your hand from something (i.e. dropping it, taking it off a 2h weapon to cast a spell, similar things) so presumably the only action cost is for doffing.

Whether or not a shield can be disarmed really depends on if armor constitutes "an item" being held as opposed to armor being worn, which a shield does fall under. Regardless, it wouldn't cost the shields user an action (in the same way that forced movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks or cost the moved person movement for their turn.

So to drop a shield currently worn, would be 1 action to doff it and, I would say it did not require your interact with an object to drop it. Similarly, I'd allow disarming as the shield is far less secure than physically worn armor (Although if the target was restrained in some fashion I'd plausibly let characters start removing the targets gauntlets, undoing straps etc, as interact with object/actions).

To clarify with your group: Ask them to find the term "free action" anywhere in 5th edition. It doesn't exist. Interact with an Object, you get one per round, you can use your action to do a second one.

[JAL_1138]

Combining the two points, You could made this dependent on how your shield is rigged. Strapped: takes an action to doff, cannot be disarmed. No Strap: free action to drop, but can be disarmed. There may be other benefits or hindrances to each mode if this needs further balancing.

I like this solution (and might be stealing it for home games).

[Kane0]

Our group has it as the free interaction you get during an action. It can also be disarmed and destroyed normally.

If one of us were to argue that it would take an action to doff I would argue the shield master feat takes it back to a bonus or free interaction.

[Santra]

Can a familiar use the help action to assist you in doffing or donning?

[MaxWilson]

So I'm DMing for my group at the moment, and a question's come up about shields. As far as I can see, the RAW is that the only way for someone to go from using a shield to not using it is to spend an action Doffing it.

However, my group argues that it should be possible to drop a shield as a free action, as even with a second strap it shouldn't be that tough to take it off. Similarly, I think it makes sense that you should be able to Disarm a shield, but I find it difficult to reconcile that with requiring the full action to voluntarily take it off.

So my question is simple: Does anyone here play shields as being droppable / Disarm able, and if so, how does it play in practice?

The AD&D-ish way would be to allow you to disrupt a shield without completely Disarming it. You would use rules similar to Disarm, but on a success the wielder would not drop it, it would merely be tangled up and useless until such time as he took an action to unfoul it.

[djreynolds]

IMO it depends on what shield you use.
- If your shield has a strap (http://s905.photobucket.com/user/HobieMods/media/Captain%20America%20WIPs/MovieHeaterShieldBack.jpg.html) it can't be disarmed, but you need an action to take it off.
- If your shield has just a grip (http://www.larp.com/midgard/shield3.jpg) you can drop it as a "interact with an item" free action, but it can be disarmed. Stowing it still takes an action.

That's good. I like that. I prefer versatile weapons, and going from sword and board to two-handed chops with a battle axe or long sword. Real simple.

[Malifice]

Viking shield:

http://www.outfit4events.com/runtime/cache/images/productFull/Wikingerschild-vikinsky-stit-Viking-ield_01.jpg

The strap is to sling it on your back when not in use. There is no 'arm strap' - all an arm strap does is makes it harder to manouver and block with the thing. This is common with Roman, Viking, Greek and Celtic shields. Strapped shields were more to be used on horseback.

The difficulty is unslinging it from your back (would take some time considering most adventurers are lugging around a backpack with 30+ pounds of crap, several weapons, and suits of armor).


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRILN48S62E

[djreynolds]

Cool visual. I don't want to get into heavy shields and tower shields. But this guys shield is what I think of as a "shield" in the generic. If you want as bonus action to swing your shield on you back and go two handed chops and then bring it back into play and go sword and board... sounds cool. You can do it.

[Coidzor]

Right now we're playing it that shields are removable/donable as part of a movement or taking the attack action the same way that weapons can be stowed or drawn as part of moving or attacking.

So far my Barbarian is the only character who I can recall that has really taken advantage of this, and that's in order to get a hand free in order to initiate grapples without putting away my weapon or to switch to using two-hands on a Versatile weapon or once to switch to a two-handed backup weapon.

[djreynolds]

Right now we're playing it that shields are removable/donable as part of a movement or taking the attack action the same way that weapons can be stowed or drawn as part of moving or attacking.

So far my Barbarian is the only character who I can recall that has really taken advantage of this, and that's in order to get a hand free in order to initiate grapples without putting away my weapon or to switch to using two-hands on a Versatile weapon or once to switch to a two-handed backup weapon.

Yeah, agreed. I think if during combat you can describe what you're doing it really makes the players much more involved. If want to go from sword and board, to two handing a battle axe, and then going one-handed to grapple with that off hand and even pull a hand axe and throw it at his buddy charging in. I just go done watching "Last of the Mohicans" great for guys who want to play rangers and barbarians, and dueling hand axes and daggers. To me a shield is weapon that is attacking the other guys weapon, like pitcher jamming a guy in the hands to he cannot hit with the sweet spot of the bat.

[djreynolds]

I'm all for playing within the rules, so if does take an entire or full action to don or doff a shield, do you still get your movement. This is actually important to the design of some characters, who don't get fighting styles or lots of feats.

A barbarian IMO is upgraded significantly over a fighter if he cannot at least move as he dons or doffs a shield. A fighter may like to switch between gear sets and fighting styles to gain a tactical advantage. Such as dexterity based warrior going from long bow to rapier and shield as his enemy closes the distance.

Though I personally like barbarian with shield master, he can do well without a shield and therefore can battle with just a glaive and throw hand axes and he "assaults" his way to the archer.

So RAW, is movement allowed during the don and doff a shield or does it take the entire full action?

[Longcat]

Action to Don/Doff. My table does not play with the optional disarming rules in the DMG.

[djreynolds]

Action to Don/Doff. My table does not play with the optional disarming rules in the DMG.

But is movement allowed? Or you're saying I'm just standing there while I do this and cannot move before or after until the next round.

[Coidzor]

So RAW, is movement allowed during the don and doff a shield or does it take the entire full action?

You get your movement and your action, IIRC, so I don't see any reason why spending one's action doing something would prevent one from moving in and of itself.

[djreynolds]

The conversation of the barbarian's DPR got me thinking of how to best one. Of course it involves moving from melee to range and so on. Otherwise, I don't think I could go great sword vs great sword with one. But the don and doffing of a shield to switch weapons may be needed. Barbarians are tough opponents. A dex fighter would at some point have to get into range with a bow, fire and then shield up. I'm assuming crossbow expert has changed since the new errata.

[Longcat]

But is movement allowed? Or you're saying I'm just standing there while I do this and cannot move before or after until the next round.

Of course it is. Action, Movement, Reaction and Bonus Action are what you have each round, and taking an action that consumes the Action leaves you with the other three available.

[djreynolds]

Of course it is. Action, Movement, Reaction and Bonus Action are what you have each round, and taking an action that consumes the Action leaves you with the other three available.

So lets say I'm firing a bow. I put the bow away and pull forth a sword, now sling the bow away is eating up my action while the other drawing the sword is my free interact with object. Now I can still move and possibly react with AoO. But if I wanted to put away a bow, pull forth a sword, and ready a shield, I cannot do all three. But I could put away the bow with interact with object, don a shield with my action, move and possibly use my bonus action from Shield Master to shove?

I'm sorry to ask?

[Coidzor]

But if I wanted to put away a bow, pull forth a sword, and ready a shield, I cannot do all three.

I don't think so, no. I think you can put away the bow as part of your movement and ready the shield as your action. OR put away the bow as part of your movement and then pull out the sword as part of taking the attack action.


But I could put away the bow with interact with object, don a shield with my action, move and possibly use my bonus action from Shield Master to shove?

No, you can't shove as a bonus action using Shield Master without taking the Attack action, which you can no longer do because you used your action to don a shield.

[djreynolds]

Its getting clearer now. Thank you.

Barbarian's "non-dependence" on a shield is actually pretty powerful.