Player Wants Benefits Of Two Shields

[Jarlhen]

So essentially the character is a support cleric. He has 0 use for a melee weapon in his day-to-day adventuring. So he wants to use 2 shields. Fine, the Phb is clear that you only get AC from 1 shield. But that's not why he wants it. He has a +1 shield and recently they found a shield of the sentinel. The sentinel gives the player advantage on initiative and perception checks. And I wonder if that's something that he can do. The Phb states you only get the benefit of one shield. But in the context I feel it's about AC. So the question is, could he get the benefit of his +1 shield and the sentinel shield at the same time by using both?

[Vaz]

The rules are clear. No.

Do you want to give the player that ability? Bearing in mind that the average opponent will need to roll 3 higher to hit this individual, when they're not attacking any way. Also, you've got to question what other abilities do your party members have that they aren't using. I'm a Warlock with Eldritch Blast, and I'm not using my Ranged Weapon proficiencies. Does that mean I should be able to get a boost for free? It's entirely up to you.

[nickl_2000]

So essentially the character is a support cleric. He has 0 use for a melee weapon in his day-to-day adventuring. So he wants to use 2 shields. Fine, the Phb is clear that you only get AC from 1 shield. But that's not why he wants it. He has a +1 shield and recently they found a shield of the sentinel. The sentinel gives the player advantage on initiative and perception checks. And I wonder if that's something that he can do. The Phb states you only get the benefit of one shield. But in the context I feel it's about AC. So the question is, could he get the benefit of his +1 shield and the sentinel shield at the same time by using both?


If you only get benefits from one shield according to the PhB, then you can't get stuff from both. I don't have the book to see RAW, but it appears that it's one shield or another. Now, if oyu as a DM want to give him both shields, that's a houserule that others have allowed. That being said if you allowed it, he better have the feat War Caster, since he won't be able to do any Somatic Components with a shield in both hands otherwise.

[Lombra]

I see no issue in combining magical effects of two shields at once. You are wearing them so the effects should work RAW, and the player chooses which to use for AC calculation.

[Sir cryosin]

So essentially the character is a support cleric. He has 0 use for a melee weapon in his day-to-day adventuring. So he wants to use 2 shields. Fine, the Phb is clear that you only get AC from 1 shield. But that's not why he wants it. He has a +1 shield and recently they found a shield of the sentinel. The sentinel gives the player advantage on initiative and perception checks. And I wonder if that's something that he can do. The Phb states you only get the benefit of one shield. But in the context I feel it's about AC. So the question is, could he get the benefit of his +1 shield and the sentinel shield at the same time by using both?

Why not let him have the +1 and the sentinel. He's not getting the sentinel shield AC. There is no problem he's not braking your game or power grabbing.

[DivisibleByZero]

I see no issue in combining magical effects of two shields at once. You are wearing them so the effects should work RAW, and the player chooses which to use for AC calculation.

Nope.
As others have stated, you can only use one, per RAW.

Shields. A shield is made from wood or metal and is carried in one hand. Wielding a shield increases your Armor Class by 2. You can benefit from only one shield at a time.

You can benefit from only one shield at a time.
Seems pretty clear what the RAW is here, and it is not what you said it was.
Not that I think it's OP or anything, but if he's asking about the RAW, then the answer is one only.

[Sir cryosin]

Nope.
As others have stated, you can only use one, per RAW.

Shields. A shield is made from wood or metal and is carried in one hand. Wielding a shield increases your Armor Class by 2. You can benefit from only one shield at a time.

You can benefit from only one shield at a time.
Seems pretty clear what the RAW is here, and it is not what you said it was.
Not that I think it's OP or anything, but if he's asking about the RAW, then the answer is one only.

Fine pick up tavern brawler and call it a improvised weapon.

[Jacquerel]

I would only allow him to get the AC bonus from one shield, but use any other properties from both.
The book says you can only benefit from one shield at a time, but that is also in the section where it is talking about AC, so I'm not sure it's quite as clear as they make it sound. Either way, it's what I'd rule as a DM.

[nickl_2000]

Fine pick up tavern brawler and call it a improvised weapon.

Technically this would be an issue of specific verses general though. The feat is general in saying that it allows non-weapons to be used as weapons (paraphrased). The shield definition specifically says only one shield at a time. According to JC and many others, specific always takes precedence over general.

Again though, no one said this is a AL game. Just Houserule that it's fine by the DM and make casting harder, then move on with life :)

[Lombra]

Nope.
As others have stated, you can only use one, per RAW.

Shields. A shield is made from wood or metal and is carried in one hand. Wielding a shield increases your Armor Class by 2. You can benefit from only one shield at a time.

You can benefit from only one shield at a time.
Seems pretty clear what the RAW is here, and it is not what you said it was.
Not that I think it's OP or anything, but if he's asking about the RAW, then the answer is one only.

I believe that it is intended for AC calculation purposes, magic items properties only require to wear/wield the magic item, and nothing stops you from wearing two shields, and I don't find it game-breaking, but I can understand why wouldn't someone allow it under the banner of RAW.

[N810]

Give him a second magic shield with the properties of the Bracers of Defense (+2AC) when used with a second shield.
There, now the can basically wield 2 shields worth of AC.

[Lombra]

Give him a second magic shield with the properties of the Bracers of Defense (+2AC) when used with a second shield.
There, now the can basically wield 2 shields worth of AC.

The OP talks about magic properties, not AC stacking.

[DivisibleByZero]

The book says you can only benefit from one shield at a time, but that is also in the section where it is talking about AC, so I'm not sure it's quite as clear as they make it sound.

It's not in the section talking about AC. It's in the section describing armor and shields. It's in the description for the item.


I believe that it is intended for AC calculation purposes,...

You can run your game the way that you want. You can houserule anything you want. You can determine RAI to be whatever you choose to read it as, as it makes sense to you.
If you're asking about RAI, only the designers can answer. If you're asking about RAW, one shield only. That is made perfectly clear in the item's description.

For the record, I'm an RAI guy. But you have to know what RAW says before you can determine what you believe RAI to be.
Personally, I believe the RAI to be exactly what the RAW states. It's in the section on armor. It's quite obvious that you can only benefit from one set of armor, because you have only one body to wear it. But with shields, you have two hands, so they made certain that you understood that even though you have two hands, you can only use one shield by the rules.

[Laserlight]

If you ignore RAW, then can I get sentinel or other extra effects by having the shield slung on my back? Unlike dual-shielding, people actually did wear shields like that.

In addition to RAW, some downsides of dual-shield: it takes an action to equip or drop a shield. If you've got two shields, you have both hands full. Need Warcaster feat. No grabbing ropes to keep yourself from falling, no carrying things, no climbing, no dragging a comrade to safety.

This is a great opportunity for him to Not Be Greedy. Pass one of the shields on to someone else who can actually use it.

[Jacquerel]

Sentinel specifically only gives you benefits when you are wielding the shield, having it on your back isn't enough.
Clerics can have their holy symbol on a shield, meaning spellcasting isn't a problem. He still can't grab a rope without dropping a shield, but this is a problem any shield-and-weapon using character would have :P

[nickl_2000]

Sentinel specifically only gives you benefits when you are wielding the shield, having it on your back isn't enough.
Clerics can have their holy symbol on a shield, meaning spellcasting isn't a problem. He still can't grab a rope without dropping a shield, but this is a problem any shield-and-weapon using character would have :P

Material Components aren't an issue. Somatic components are still a problem without Warcaster.

From Warcaster:

You can perform the somatic components of spells even when you have weapons or a shield in one or both hands.

[Lombra]

You can run your game the way that you want. You can houserule anything you want. You can determine RAI to be whatever you choose to read it as, as it makes sense to you.
If you're asking about RAI, only the designers can answer. If you're asking about RAW, one shield only. That is made perfectly clear in the item's description.

For the record, I'm an RAI guy. But you have to know what RAW says before you can determine what you believe RAI to be.

And I said in my post that I can understand who wants to forbit it because of RAW, although magic items rules can be different, and ignoring them just because of a paragraph in the PHB seems like a loss of precious information. You can't benefit from the same bonus from a copy of what grants it (like spells, paladin auras, rings...) the player is wearing two different shields, so the rules of magic items would allow magic properties staking, but not AC stacking, but this is fairly circular, because then you can call out the PHB shields paragraph, and so on. Which is the specific? A rule for shields or a rule for magic items?

[DivisibleByZero]

And I said in my post that I can understand who wants to forbit it because of RAW, although magic items rules can be different, and ignoring them just because of a paragraph in the PHB seems like a loss of precious information. You can't benefit from the same bonus from a copy of what grants it (like spells, paladin auras, rings...) the player is wearing two different shields, so the rules of magic items would allow magic properties staking, but not AC stacking, but this is fairly circular, because then you can call out the PHB shields paragraph, and so on. Which is the specific? A rule for shields or a rule for magic items?

see my edit, above:

Personally, I believe the RAI to be exactly what the RAW states. It's in the section on armor. It's quite obvious that you can only benefit from one set of armor, because you have only one body to wear it. But with shields, you have two hands, so they made certain that you understood that even though you have two hands, you can only use one shield by the rules.

[Maxilian]

Let him, and count it as giving the PC a +2 Shield (so obviously, let him only in the moment that you would give that player that buff)

[Jacquerel]

Material Components aren't an issue. Somatic components are still a problem without Warcaster.

From Warcaster:

http://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/07/18/can-cleric-use-holy-symbol-shield-for-a-focus-while-also-holding-a-weapon-in-other-hand/

This isn't super clear from reading the book though, granted.
Spellcasting Fighters or Druids with shields need Warcaster. Clerics don't.

[Laserlight]

He still can't grab a rope without dropping a shield, but this is a problem any shield-and-weapon using character would have :P

Not actually quite true. If you have sword-and-board, you can free-action "drop the sword" if your life depends on grabbing the rope right now. You can't just drop a shield, you have to spend an action to take it off.

[Jarlhen]

Thanks for the many replies. Very helpful.

To clarify though, this isn't about the AC. This is about the magical effects. Essentially he'd have +3 AC from his +1 shield, then he would get the magical effects from the sentinel shield. It's not about combining the AC from two shields.

[Joe the Rat]

As rules state, you can only benefit from one shield at a time. So the AC does not stack*. If we want to extend that to the rest of the shield's attributes, then you can only benefit from shield, +1, or sentinel shield at any given time. So +3 total AC (when in a fight), or +2 AC and advantage on perception and initiative checks (the rest of the time - up to when initiative is rolled). So long as one of them is emblazoned with your deity's holy symbol (for S,M spells), and you have Warcaster (for no-M spells like cure wounds), You'll be fine. It will take an action to remove one if you need a free hand for anything (grappling, grabbing something or someone, using objects or magic items, probably climbing), but you're otherwise fine.

* - Well, Tavern brawler makes you proficient with improvised weapons (which shields would be), and Dual Wielding would let you use two "not light" weapons, and give a +1 to AC when you have two weapons wielded, but that way lies silliness... particularly since the read is a bit dodgy, and that takes three feats (you need Warcaster for half your spell list) to pull off. Better to take a level in fighter for defense style.

[Mandragola]

Nope. The magic item rules are pretty specific in terms of what you can do, for a reason. Letting someone use a second shield would be like letting them have a 4th attuned item or something like that.

And also, they'd look really silly.

[Mortis_Elrod]

Nope. The magic item rules are pretty specific in terms of what you can do, for a reason. Letting someone use a second shield would be like letting them have a 4th attuned item or something like that.

And also, they'd look really silly.

I dont know does this look silly to you?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55ANN_2qU0Q&t=87s

Also I agree, RAW is clear on this. Benefit from one shield at a time, but if you want him to get both have him get both. AC doesn't matter.

[Citan]

I see no issue in combining magical effects of two shields at once. You are wearing them so the effects should work RAW, and the player chooses which to use for AC calculation.
This. I totally agree with this. After all, this character is also potentially gimping himself...
- Very feeble and unreliable weapon attack, unless he invests in Tavern Brawler and still.
- Very complex spellcasting management: AFAIK he couldn't cast any spell requiring somatic with both hands clenching on the shield's grips. So he would require to either craft focus in shield (is that possible? Would that totally fix the problem?) or invest in the Warcaster feat.
And any player that goes that far in his character building to make a concept work should be allowed to make it work unless this concept had the potential of breaking balance hard.

And I don't see how this could break balance hard... ;)

[LordFluffy]

But in the context I feel it's about AC.
I would read it that way, personally.

Remind him that you can't do somantic components with both hands occupied, though.

[RickAllison]

Key thing to note is that you do NOT need to wield the Sentinel Shield to get its bonuses. You need to hold it. A wizard can take advantage of he shield by just holding it just as she could hold a Sword of Sharpness purely to use it as a flashlight (I have done this) without losing spellcasting. It is a very quirky item in that regard.

[Puh Laden]

When initiative is rolled and when rolling for perception checks he'll choose to gain the benefits of the sentinel shield. When getting hit he'll instantly switch to gaining the benefits of the other shield because nothing is ever said about switching between the benefits as needing to be on the character's turn or using reactions.

[Slipperychicken]

So essentially the character is a support cleric. He has 0 use for a melee weapon in his day-to-day adventuring. So he wants to use 2 shields. Fine, the Phb is clear that you only get AC from 1 shield. But that's not why he wants it. He has a +1 shield and recently they found a shield of the sentinel. The sentinel gives the player advantage on initiative and perception checks. And I wonder if that's something that he can do. The Phb states you only get the benefit of one shield. But in the context I feel it's about AC. So the question is, could he get the benefit of his +1 shield and the sentinel shield at the same time by using both?

Not RAW, but I think it's reasonable. But it occupies both his hands, so he can't cast perform somatic components while wielding a shield this way (unless he has War Caster of course). Remember that donning and doffing shields both cost an action.

[Vaz]

I dont know does this look silly to you?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55ANN_2qU0Q&t=87s

Yes, but been a long while since I've heard Heet Mob. Memories!

[Kane0]

Sure, why not. Use the AC bonus from the +1 shield and the other effects of the other one.

Note: He will probably need warcaster to cast though, since both hands will be full. Also no attacking without say the Shield master feat.

[Jacquerel]

Sure, why not. Use the AC bonus from the +1 shield and the other effects of the other one.

Note: He will probably need warcaster to cast though, since both hands will be full. Also no attacking without say the Shield master feat.

Sage Advice says Clerics don't need Warcaster to do somatic components as long as their holy symbol is on the shield.
Then again Mearls said in his recent AMA that he doesn't even bother with caring what casters are holding to cast spells at all at his table anyway so ymmv :V