Granting shield proficiency to a replacement character

[KasaiSV]

Hello all,

Relatively new DM here. I've found myself in an unfamiliar situation. In the last session we ran, one of the PCs died. I'm working with him to create a new PC and we've more or less hammered out his character but there was one aspect of it that I'm not sure about.

Because this character will be replacing the previous one, it's going to be coming in at level 6. The character he's designed is essentially a melee range warlock that wields only a shield and spells. Not having innate shield proficiency, we were looking at the different ways it would be possible for him to get it, which from what we've been able to tell is either the Moderately Armored feat or by duel classing into a class that gives the proficiency. Looking into it more, we ran across the possible option of off-time training, which primarily references languages and tools, but also states that other proficiencies could be possible per the DM's discretion. In the training section, it references the gold/time costs of training. I have two questions regarding the general use of this feature.

1) Is it generally accepted that a PC can train weapon/armor/shield proficencies by using this optional feature? I feel that shield proficiency is pretty strong and I don't want to make it seem that I'm giving this character any special advantage over the other PCs.

2) Given that it is a possible use of training, how have people generally handled training for characters that come in above level 1? The training rules make sense and seem balanced when they are dealing with characters that are currently in play, as the downsides of the training include a long amount of time where they are not adventuring, gaining gold, or gaining experience. When the training happens prior to the character's time in play, it seems those downsides are much less prominent. The gold cost could be accounted for, as the characters were going to be entering play with some preexisting gold/upgraded items, and it would be easy enough to simply reduce that amount in lieu of the training. The time cost on the other hand seems much harder to account for. Ideally I would like to give this character whatever opportunities they may have had if they were played from the start but I'm unsure how that should be done.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks.

[Kane0]

The usual way I've seen people do it is a level or two of Fighter, which gives all sorts of benefits for a warlock.

Other than that there is the Moderately Armored feat (not the worst use of an ASI if you have an odd Dex), swapping out something else with DM permission for it or learning it in downtime (either from DMG or UA training).
I've also heard of cases where DMs allow proficiency as part of the Sheld Master feat.

[djreynolds]

The usual way I've seen people do it is a level or two of Fighter, which gives all sorts of benefits for a warlock.

Other than that there is the Moderately Armored feat (not the worst use of an ASI if you have an odd Dex), swapping out something else with DM permission for it or learning it in downtime (either from DMG or UA training).
I've also heard of cases where DMs allow proficiency as part of the Sheld Master feat.

100%

Moderately Armored is odd feat, but if you don't want to multiclass.... it is very powerful... so grab it.

And you get a choice between dex and strength, +1.

Also other classes like ranger are out there, if you have dex and wis 13, and fighter is there also

[MrMcBobb]

I like the idea of just giving him it and reducing his starting equipment. Chat with the other players and say something like:

"Following the death of *PC* your party has taken time off adventuring to mourn and reflect upon their lifestyles. Is the risk too great for the reward? After much introspection they decide to look for another party member and hone their skills so as to be better prepared for the next adventure."

This way you can give them the downtime required to train a skill/language or make some extra money betting on Owlbear fights, that way you avoid having to multiclass your mate's new Warlock and your PCs get a nice wee freebie as well. Stops anyone being too jealous of "special treatment" and can add a bit of flavour to some characters.

[nickl_2000]

I wouldn't be to upset with a player paying for a Prof in shield as long as they lost something else. Maybe they start with less magic items, or lower quality magic (or none at all if they are rare).

Also, in my opinion, defensive items are less likely to make a PC OP to the point of annoying others. Giving a player an amazing sword that allows it to take over combat will annoy me. A defensive item that takes pressure off me so I can do something cool, is good overall

[Vogonjeltz]

1) Is it generally accepted that a PC can train weapon/armor/shield proficencies by using this optional feature? I feel that shield proficiency is pretty strong and I don't want to make it seem that I'm giving this character any special advantage over the other PCs.

2) Given that it is a possible use of training, how have people generally handled training for characters that come in above level 1? The training rules make sense and seem balanced when they are dealing with characters that are currently in play, as the downsides of the training include a long amount of time where they are not adventuring, gaining gold, or gaining experience. When the training happens prior to the character's time in play, it seems those downsides are much less prominent. The gold cost could be accounted for, as the characters were going to be entering play with some preexisting gold/upgraded items, and it would be easy enough to simply reduce that amount in lieu of the training. The time cost on the other hand seems much harder to account for. Ideally I would like to give this character whatever opportunities they may have had if they were played from the start but I'm unsure how that should be done.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks.

1) No, the default is it only works to learn a new language or train with a set of tools. (PHB 187)

IF you choose to allow additional training options (for example, shield proficiency) then it must be available to all characters, otherwise you are giving this character special advantage over other PCs.

2) Presumably it would cut the character's total starting wealth by 250gp (the training cost). You might also have the character show up 250 days older for each proficiency they've trained for than they would have been without it. (i.e. If the PC knows +2 languages he's more than a year older and 500 gold poorer).

[Yuroch Kern]

For the Moderately Armored feat, just shield is like a third of it. The Skilled feat is three skills. So, if you just wanted simple math, let him have it at the cost of a beginning skill. Especially if he chose the Soldier background. You seem to like his concept, and a shield isn't a huge advantage, and by asking this you're set to grant it. Seems legit.

[Drackolus]

You could just say he takes a shield pact. Similar to a blade pact, but a shield. Not sure what invocations you could allow there.
Could also let him be a hexblade.
The feat is pretty darn good too, especially if he doesn't really want to do melee. 14 dex, half plate and a shield gives you 19 ac.