Bucklers?

[Baptor]

Bucklers are not in 5th edition.

I liked bucklers.

So what if I introduced bucklers, basically a shield for rogues, that only gives +1 AC (instead of a shield's +2 AC)?

Overpowered? Thoughts?

[Kane0]

Sure why not

[Zman]

I introduced bucklers. The provide only +1 AC, but can be donned and doffed as a bonus action instead of a fully action.

[HolyDraconus]

Bucklers are not in 5th edition.

I liked bucklers.

So what if I introduced bucklers, basically a shield for rogues, that only gives +1 AC (instead of a shield's +2 AC)?

Overpowered? Thoughts?

I always assumed that all shields in 5e WAS bucklers. They don't give the defense of previous editions large, full or tower shields, or the downsides of them. To me, they may as well be. I miss my kite shields.

[Zman]

I always assumed that all shields in 5e WAS bucklers. They don't give the defense of previous editions large, full or tower shields, or the downsides of them. To me, they may as well be. I miss my kite shields.

With bounded accuracy a +2 AC is pretty huge, IMO they most definitely represent full Kite shields.

[imanidiot]

I introduced bucklers. The provide only +1 AC, but can be donned and doffed as a bonus action instead of a fully action.

I would even go so far to say that a buckler could be doffed as a free object interaction.

[Easy_Lee]

The most peculiar thing about shields to me is that it takes an action to don or doff them. That's how long it takes to use a first aid kit or apply poison to a weapon. Clearly all shields in 5e are strapped on. That's strange, considering how many shields throughout both history and fantasy just have handles. I mean look at Captain America, for example.

[Baptor]

I introduced bucklers. The provide only +1 AC, but can be donned and doffed as a bonus action instead of a fully action.

So far no one's spoken out against letting rogues use a shield that gives +1 AC. I'm getting the feeling it seems safe to everyone?

[Kane0]

Yeah, nothing gamebreaking.
It takes up a hand so they can't use an off hand or two handed weapon, plus donning/doffing interrupts their cunning action.

[Zman]

So far no one's spoken out against letting rogues use a shield that gives +1 AC. I'm getting the feeling it seems safe to everyone?


Yeah, nothing gamebreaking.
It takes up a hand so they can't use an off hand or two handed weapon, plus donning/doffing interrupts their cunning action.

Yep, one of the reasons I assigned the bonus action donning/doffing. It's usable for rogues, but far from a no brainer i.e. lacking the Offhand attack for more reliable sneak attack delivery.

[N810]

The most peculiar thing about shields to me is that it takes an action to don or doff them. That's how long it takes to use a first aid kit or apply poison to a weapon. Clearly all shields in 5e are strapped on. That's strange, considering how many shields throughout both history and fantasy just have handles. I mean look at Captain America, for example.

... Wait isn't that a strap shield ?


look to Vikings for a good example of a boss shield (handle).

[MrFahrenheit]

In 3.5, iirc, they made bucklers a shoulder-strapped shield. Could still wield two handed weapons/bows, but I believe there was a penalty. If you did this, donning/doffing would be a full action...but the character could use a crossbow and have the buckler.

I'd like tower shields, too. Could still be +2 to AC, but grant the wearer 1/2 cover vs ranged attack, and allow the user to spend his/her reaction for 3/4 cover. Could throw in a 13 str requirement and also -5 speed as well. Disadvantage on stealth too, though with the requirements and penalties, might be worth considering bumping up to +3 AC.

[Willie the Duck]

So far no one's spoken out against letting rogues use a shield that gives +1 AC. I'm getting the feeling it seems safe to everyone?

IT is a straight-up improvement of a very limited number of builds (such as melee rogue who does not use twf) that are rarely construed to be too powerful. Go for it.

[tieren]

So far no one's spoken out against letting rogues use a shield that gives +1 AC. I'm getting the feeling it seems safe to everyone?

I'd still require them to get shield proficiency somehow, and then mechanically its a question of why not just take a +2 AC shield.

[Easy_Lee]

... Wait isn't that a strap shield ?


look to Vikings for a good example of a boss shield (handle).

It is now, but IIRC it was originally handled. And yeah, vikings had some nice shields.

[N810]

huh...?
you got a picture of that ?
cause the earliest shield was the old kite shield he had in the 40's.

[Easy_Lee]

huh...?
you got a picture of that ?
cause the earliest shield was the old kite shield he had in the 40's.

Weird, could have sworn it used to have a handle but I can't find the picture. Oh well, the point still stands.

[N810]

Weird, could have sworn it used to have a handle but I can't find the picture. Oh well, the point still stands.

Maybe it was one of the later version, (seriously he had a lot of them) perhaps one of the weird energy shields ?
or maybe one of the metal ones had both straps and a handle.

[Findulidas]

Its suprising to me that you are just as quick to pick up a potion from your backpack, open it and drink it as taking off a shield, even with a strap, which you have training in. Getting out of straps really isnt that difficult and with training it should be quick and easy. I suppose it has to do with that all twohanded fighters would just hold a shield as combat starts and then drop it when its their turn. However this is also not very logical.

[Joe the Rat]

What the OP has sounds a lot like true bucklers - a small, hand-held ("boss-style") shield. I would totally allow this as a +1 AC shield, with the easy d/equip, but it is also subject to disarm. I'd offer something similar to anyone who wants a handle shield (BA or Obj A equip) instead of a strap-and-handle. I'd also be inclined to treat it as an off-hand weapon for the Dual Wielder feat (giving an advantage over just an offhand weapon), but I'm quite happy letting players jump through multiple hoops to get back to square 1.


In 3.5, iirc, they made bucklers a shoulder-strapped shield. Could still wield two handed weapons/bows, but I believe there was a penalty. If you did this, donning/doffing would be a full action...but the character could use a crossbow and have the buckler.They never changed it from the targe model. from the srd (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/armor.htm#buckler):
This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm.
The idea is a shield on your arm, but your hand is still free for bows (no prob) or two-handed and two-weapon fighting (kind of gets in the way to the tune of -1 to hit).
Oriental Adventures added the samurai-style shoulder armor, which might be what you're thinking of. It's another "studded leather" / longsword issue.


I'd like tower shields, too. Could still be +2 to AC, but grant the wearer 1/2 cover vs ranged attack, and allow the user to spend his/her reaction for 3/4 cover. Could throw in a 13 str requirement and also -5 speed as well. Disadvantage on stealth too, though with the requirements and penalties, might be worth considering bumping up to +3 AC.

Shield AC is basically half cover - kind of handy, rulewise. Simplest model possible... +2, acts as 3/4 cover (+5) vs. ranged, STR min 13 (SPD -5). Dodge action and +5 AC, and nobody's gonna shoot you. Stealth Disad - is this just a matter of the thing being large and likely to knock into things?

[greenstone]

Its suprising to me that you are just as quick to pick up a potion from your backpack, open it and drink it …
I'd rule that is two actions. First, to retrieve something from a backpack, second to activate a magic item. Taking off a pack, unbuckling /untying it, rummaging around and retrieving an item is more that "free object interaction".

[MrFahrenheit]

Shield AC is basically half cover - kind of handy, rulewise. Simplest model possible... +2, acts as 3/4 cover (+5) vs. ranged, STR min 13 (SPD -5). Dodge action and +5 AC, and nobody's gonna shoot you. Stealth Disad - is this just a matter of the thing being large and likely to knock into things?

Re: stealth, I'd say so. If you strap it to your back, then it's fine, but then you wouldn't have it equipped initially if things go sour anyhow while sneaking.

May have to give this the heavy property, else small PCs could have an argument for getting full cover.

In any event, whether strapped to the forearm or the shoulder, in-game the 3.5 buckler wasn't held by hand.

The bigger issue I see with regards to 5e is, how much would this impact bounded accuracy? Suddenly you have a bunch of heavies with tower shields, and lighter types with bucklers. ACs are increasing all around, and even if it's only by 1 (either +1 from no shield for a buckler, or +1 from the standard shield for a tower shield), 1 point of AC is a big difference in this edition.

[mephnick]

So far no one's spoken out against letting rogues use a shield that gives +1 AC. I'm getting the feeling it seems safe to everyone?

I will! Rogues already have amazing defensive and mobility options. Giving them a +1 AC with a buckler they're proficient in is akin to giving them a fighting style for free or removing the need to multiclass for shield proficiency. It smacks as pure min/maxing that really serves no purpose but to make the rogue class even better, a suggestion I'd only expect from a player who happens to be playing a rogue at the moment.

[MrFahrenheit]

I will! Rogues already have amazing defensive and mobility options. Giving them a +1 AC with a buckler they're proficient in is akin to giving them a fighting style for free or removing the need to multiclass for shield proficiency. It smacks as pure min/maxing that really serves no purpose but to make the rogue class even better, a suggestion I'd only expect from a player who happens to be playing a rogue at the moment.

This is an excellent point, and also in a way addressed my concern about the impact bucklers (and tower shields) could have on bounded accuracy. Not all characters are the same with how they avoid getting killed.

For your melee fighters, Paladins and barbarians, sure, the higher the AC, the better. Moon Druids do it by having rechargeable hp thanks to their wild shapes. But rogues? If you'll notice, they actually have a comparatively low AC when juxtaposed with the first three classes I mentioned before. That's because even if they're melee focused, their primary method of avoiding death is to avoid being a target in the first place, thanks to cunning action.