Spiked shield

[da newt]

Lizardfolk are clever enough to use them - can a PC use them? It's not light, so you couldn't TWF w/ it, but you could still use it, right?

W/ the dual wielder feat you could wield it and a weapon, right?

If you did have the dual wielder feat, would the +1 ac from the feat stack w/ the +2 ac from the shield?


Is there any RAW that excludes spiked shields?

[Unoriginal]

Lizardfolk are clever enough to use them - can a PC use them? It's not light, so you couldn't TWF w/ it, but you could still use it, right?

W/ the dual wielder feat you could wield it and a weapon, right?

If you did have the dual wielder feat, would the +1 ac from the feat stack w/ the +2 ac from the shield?


Is there any RAW that excludes spiked shields?

There is no RAW that excludes them, and no RAW that includes them. They're a part of a NPC's weapon attack and such are entirely dependent on the DM's ruling, same way as the Tlincali's spiked chain or the garrote wire from Out of the Abyss.

[JackPhoenix]

You can use any object you can hold in your hand(s) to attack with using the improvised weapon rules, though, so yes, PCs can use them to attack.

[Gale]

As someone who's DM once let them use a Spiked Shield in their game through the Dual Wielder feat, it's super fun but basically makes ordinary dual wielding completely pointless. In my case, the DM let the +1 from Dual Wielder stack with the shield, meaning I had +3 to AC in total. Even if the Spiked Shield only did 1d2 damage it was still better than any other weapon due to the extra +2 AC. It doesn't matter if you do 3 more damage a round with a Longsword if you end up taking 20 damage from an attack a shield would have let you block.

Spiked shields are overpowered in comparison to every other melee weapon if you have Dual Wielder. Otherwise, Light weapons are better since they don't require one of the worst feats in the game to use. (Dual Wielder is almost always worse than taking +2 to DEX.) Still, I imagine most people would go ahead and grab Dual Wielder for their two-weapon fighting builds if Spiked Shields were available. +3 to AC is too good to pass up. Although, I suppose Shield Master is a tempting alternative.

I'm not sure if a Spiked Shield is truly overpowered, but it can definitely be overcentralizing.

[stoutstien]

I allow them but they have a Str req and they are still shield(s) as far as the rules are concerned so no stacking with twf feat and no using two at once.

[JackPhoenix]

As someone who's DM once let them use a Spiked Shield in their game through the Dual Wielder feat, it's super fun but basically makes ordinary dual wielding completely pointless. In my case, the DM let the +1 from Dual Wielder stack with the shield, meaning I had +3 to AC in total. Even if the Spiked Shield only did 1d2 damage it was still better than any other weapon due to the extra +2 AC. It doesn't matter if you do 3 more damage a round with a Longsword if you end up taking 20 damage from an attack a shield would have let you block.

Spiked shields are overpowered in comparison to every other melee weapon if you have Dual Wielder. Otherwise, Light weapons are better since they don't require one of the worst feats in the game to use. (Dual Wielder is almost always worse than taking +2 to DEX.) Still, I imagine most people would go ahead and grab Dual Wielder for their two-weapon fighting builds if Spiked Shields were available. +3 to AC is too good to pass up. Although, I suppose Shield Master is a tempting alternative.

I'm not sure if a Spiked Shield is truly overpowered, but it can definitely be overcentralizing.

You don't need a spiked shield for any of that. Just smack them with a normal one for 1d4. You'll need Tavern Brawler too, to get proficiency to attack, but it's perfectly viable RAW.

[TIPOT]

You don't need a spiked shield for any of that. Just smack them with a normal one for 1d4. You'll need Tavern Brawler too, to get proficiency to attack, but it's perfectly viable RAW.

Getting the +1 AC for wielding two weapons would be super questionable then. An improvised weapon isn't a melee weapon by RAW (although I guess it could be debated).

[JackPhoenix]

Getting the +1 AC for wielding two weapons would be super questionable then. An improvised weapon isn't a melee weapon by RAW (although I guess it could be debated).

Neither is the spiked shield. It's an NPC attack option.

[da newt]

WRT 'would the +1 and +2 to ac stack' - I was just kidding. That wouldn't make any sense at all.

However, if your class has proficiency in all armor, shields, simple weapons, and martial weapons why wouldn't they be proficient with a spiked shield?

RAW anyone proficient w/ shields and martial weapons should be able to use one, but they would require the DW Feat to wield it AND a weapon. I can't find anything that implies that is not entirely RAW. Is there anything out there I'm missing?

[Gale]

You don't need a spiked shield for any of that. Just smack them with a normal one for 1d4. You'll need Tavern Brawler too, to get proficiency to attack, but it's perfectly viable RAW.

Originally, the build involved using Tavern Brawler instead along with an ordinary shield. But my DM ended up allowing me to have a Spiked Shield crafted by a local blacksmith, which he then treated as a martial weapon, forgoing the need for Tavern Brawler.

Personally though, I'm not a huge fan of using Tavern Brawler to "shield bash." It doesn't work without Dual Wielder, since Shields do not have the Light property, and at best Tavern Brawler, Dual Wielder, and the Two Weapon Fighting style altogether net you +1 STR or CON and 1d4 + STR bludgeoning as a bonus action. The other benefits you gain from these feats aren't really relevant for a sword and shield build; and your DM isn't likely to let you have the +1 to AC from Dual Wielder since your shield isn't classified as a weapon.

On the other hand, you could simply take Shield Master and the Dueling Fighting style. Shove an opponent prone every round as a bonus action to make all your attacks with advantage. This build only costs one feat, meaning it's functional from an earlier level and you have room for another feat or an ability score increase. Also, thanks to Dueling your damage is about the same, if not more since you're also hitting more often due to advantage.

In short, Spiked Shield is better than Tavern Brawler because it's one less feat you have to take and it's mechanically stronger. (+3 AC and 1d6 + STR damage vs +2 AC and 1d4 STR damage.)
I think if the Spiked Shield existed in the Player's Handbook as a special, shield weapon combo that 100% worked with the mechanics of Dual Wielder then it would be a really strong, overcentralizing item for these reasons. But Tavern Brawler simply doesn't have the same punch.

[JackPhoenix]

However, if your class has proficiency in all armor, shields, simple weapons, and martial weapons why wouldn't they be proficient with a spiked shield?

RAW anyone proficient w/ shields and martial weapons should be able to use one, but they would require the DW Feat to wield it AND a weapon. I can't find anything that implies that is not entirely RAW. Is there anything out there I'm missing?

Anyone can use a shield, proficiency or not. Shield proficiency removes the penalties for using an armor you're not proficient with, namely, the inability to cast spells and disadvantage on Str or Dex based rolls. Martial weapon proficiency doesn't interact with shields at all, as shield is not a weapon. It is, however, an object, which means it can be used as improvised weapon using the respective rules. And you'll need Tavern Brawler feat to get proficiency with improvised weapons.


Personally though, I'm not a huge fan of using Tavern Brawler to "shield bash." It doesn't work without Dual Wielder, since Shields do not have the Light property, and at best Tavern Brawler, Dual Wielder, and the Two Weapon Fighting style altogether net you +1 STR or CON and 1d4 + STR bludgeoning as a bonus action. The other benefits you gain from these feats aren't really relevant for a sword and shield build; and your DM isn't likely to let you have the +1 to AC from Dual Wielder since your shield isn't classified as a weapon.

You can also use shield as one of your normal attacks if you have Extra Attack, more for the aesthetics than any effect... it's worse than just attacking twice with a sword or whatever due to lower damage.

Technically, due to not being a weapon unless you attack with it, you can't use a shield (or another improvised weapon) as off-hand weapon in TWF, as TWF requires you to make an attack with a weapon while holding another weapon to get the BA attack. You'd need to attack with the shield first to qualify for the BA attack.

[rlc]

This might be a question for the RAW thread, but would playing a doppelganger give you the attacks of the humanoid you polymorph into, on top of your class features? Because I'd probably let the +1 and +2 stack if you got the spiked shield by polymorphing. I'd probably even let you get +1 to both attack, damage, and ac if that spiked shield became +1 later.

[Unoriginal]

This might be a question for the RAW thread, but would playing a doppelganger give you the attacks of the humanoid you polymorph into, on top of your class features? Because I'd probably let the +1 and +2 stack if you got the spiked shield by polymorphing. I'd probably even let you get +1 to both attack, damage, and ac if that spiked shield became +1 later.

Pretty sure the Doppleganger's capacities doesn't change no matter whose appearance they took. It's only cosmetic.

[rlc]

Pretty sure the Doppleganger's capacities doesn't change no matter whose appearance they took. It's only cosmetic.

Then it's basically a weaker changeling?

[Unoriginal]

Then it's basically a weaker changeling?

Other way around, changeling are weaker Dopplegangers.

[rlc]

Other way around, changeling are weaker Dopplegangers.

Doppelgangers get racial spells, but I'd rather get the +3 to charisma, if that's the major difference.

[da newt]

Why isn't a spiked shield a weapon? It is listed as a melee weapon attack and as a weapon in the Lizardfolk stat block.

Actions
Multiattack. The lizardfolk makes two melee attacks, each one with a different weapon.

Bite. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) piercing damage.

Heavy Club. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) bludgeoning damage.

Javelin. Melee or Ranged Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft. or range 30/120 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) piercing damage.

Spiked Shield. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) piercing damage.

[stoutstien]

Why isn't a spiked shield a weapon? It is listed as a melee weapon attack and as a weapon in the Lizardfolk stat block.

Actions
Multiattack. The lizardfolk makes two melee attacks, each one with a different weapon.

Bite. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) piercing damage.

Heavy Club. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) bludgeoning damage.

Javelin. Melee or Ranged Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft. or range 30/120 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) piercing damage.

Spiked Shield. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) piercing damage.

It is a weapon for the NPC but just for simplicity and balance it's better to treat it as a shield for PCs.

If it's treated like a weapon then you could realistically use two of them at once where if it's a Shield first then the rules prevent it.

if it's treated like a weapon then it would qualify for stuff like booming blade which would make it the de facto best option for anyone with proficiency

Treating it like a shield automatically solves any questions on who is proficient with it

Treating as a shield prevents it from moving the attack or AC curve. It's a different option not a better one.

[JackPhoenix]

Why isn't a spiked shield a weapon? It is listed as a melee weapon attack and as a weapon in the Lizardfolk stat block.

Actions
Multiattack. The lizardfolk makes two melee attacks, each one with a different weapon.

Bite. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) piercing damage.

Heavy Club. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) bludgeoning damage.

Javelin. Melee or Ranged Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft. or range 30/120 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) piercing damage.

Spiked Shield. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) piercing damage.

Does that mean the lizardfolk can't bite and make another attack, because bite isn't an weapon? Being melee weapon attack doesn't mean anything, everything that isn't spell or ranged is melee weapon attack, it doesn't matter if a weapon is involved. Unarmed strikes are melee weapon attack, smashing someone with a rock is a melee weapon attack...

You're better with it not being a weapon anyway, because it's listed neither as simple or martial weapon, which means there's no way to get a proficiency with it. At least there's Tavern Brawler for improvised weapons. And it being a weapon means it wouldn't work with Dueling FS.

[heavyfuel]

Spiked anything is probably going to be a "naw" for me. Spiked shields, spiked armor, spiked chain. They all fall in this category of things that are a too non-sensical for my tastes and I just straight up disallow them.

For the one Barbarian that uses spiked armor I'd just refluff the armor as almost literally anything else.


As someone who's DM once let them use a Spiked Shield in their game through the Dual Wielder feat, it [...] basically makes ordinary dual wielding completely pointless.

This was a problem back in 3e, where there was little mechanical reason for you not to TWF with spiked armor or (spiked) shields

[da newt]

I'm pretty sure that the bite attack considers the jaws/teeth to be a natural weapon, and therefore a melee weapon, right?

[Chalkarts]

Consequently, could you dual wield spiked shields?
2 fisting pointy Kite Shields among a throng of orcs would be fun.

[da newt]

I think you could dual wield spiked shields, but only get the AC bonus from one. (PHB pg 144)