Evasion shield

[Cowboy_ninja]

evasion states light armor or no armor. so can my fighter rouge use a tower shield and still use evasion as long as he is in light/no armor?

[Zherog]

The rogue's evasion ability start light or no armor, to be clear. The ability is defined in different places with different conditions.

With the picking of nits out of the way...

Nothing in the rogue's version of the ability mentions shields, which leads me to believe the rogue can use the ability with any shield - including a tower shield.

[BRC]

However, If you want to do that, I would suggjest bringing some pizza of +3 DM bribery to the session.

[Deth Muncher]

And possibly a large block of cheese.

[SadisticFishing]

... Why not? This makes a scary amount of sense. Ever wonder how you dodged that fireball? Maybe the 6 foot tall tower of metal had something to do with it.

[BCOVertigo]

....well I guess I would allow it, since it actually forces evasion to make sense for once. Instead of entering "rogue-space" you duck behind the shield.

I just can't figure out why would you would want to do this. Not very rogueish in the traditional sense.


Edit: ACCURSED NINJA!
/violence!

[Azerian Kelimon]

It actually pretty much doesn't. I mean, an explosion would go above, through the sides, and down the shield, and it would only make you less agile. A rogue also relies on stealth, and I think shields detract from hide and move silently.

[JackMage666]

Why would you want to be in Light Armor and a Tower Shield, though? You give up all the mobility of Light Armor when you use the Tower Shield, meaning it'd be alot better to ditch the shield, or put on Full Plate.

Unless you're trying to powergame.

[Quietus]

It actually pretty much doesn't. I mean, an explosion would go above, through the sides, and down the shield, and it would only make you less agile. A rogue also relies on stealth, and I think shields detract from hide and move silently.

They don't detract if you put them on your back!

[Lord Tataraus]

... Why not? This makes a scary amount of sense. Ever wonder how you dodged that fireball? Maybe the 6 foot tall tower of metal had something to do with it.

Because it is made of wood? /nitpick

If you do get evasion, I don't think your shield should so it would take damage as well and even if you did pay the 45gp extra for a steel tower shield, its probably won't survive.

[RTGoodman]

I just can't figure out why would you would want to do this. Not very rogueish in the traditional sense.

Because "you can instead use [the tower shield] as total cover, though you must give up your attacks to do so." (From the SRD).

Also from the SRD, "You need cover or concealment in order to attempt a Hide check."

I've heard of people doing this before - you grab a tower shield, use its cover to hide, and then make your next attack as a sneak attack because you're hiding behind the shield strapped to your arm.

Of course, it says you can use it for cover, but doesn't state if switching between "shield-mode" and "cover-mode" takes an action. Thus, as some people interpret it, you can then switch back to using it in "shield-mode" next round and attack, getting sneak attack because you're attacking from hiding.

[Riffington]

What kind of DM would give your rogue sneak attack just because he moved from his tower shield?

Unless it's an enemy that's fooled by "Peek-a-boo"...

[nhbdy]

Because "you can instead use [the tower shield] as total cover, though you must give up your attacks to do so." (From the SRD).

Also from the SRD, "You need cover or concealment in order to attempt a Hide check."

I've heard of people doing this before - you grab a tower shield, use its cover to hide, and then make your next attack as a sneak attack because you're hiding behind the shield strapped to your arm.

Of course, it says you can use it for cover, but doesn't state if switching between "shield-mode" and "cover-mode" takes an action. Thus, as some people interpret it, you can then switch back to using it in "shield-mode" next round and attack, getting sneak attack because you're attacking from hiding.

that is true, i can see it now, u are fighting an orc barbarian...

"Me smash stupid rogue"
rogue hides behind tower shield
"where rogue go?"
rogue sneak attacks barbarian, killing it

lmao!

[Person_Man]

The armor check penalty from a tower shield is -10. The armor check penalty applies to Balance, Climb, Escape Artist, Hide, Jump, Move Silently, Sleight of Hand, and Tumble checks. So most of your useful Rogue Skills will be screwed.

You could do it, but I'm not sure why you'd want to.

[Edea]

lmao, "rogue-space," that rocks.

Imagine a rogue wearing the tower shield on her head like some ludicrously oversized sun hat.

"Gotta protect my skin, don't want to get burned *wink*."

[RTGoodman]

What kind of DM would give your rogue sneak attack just because he moved from his tower shield?

Unless it's an enemy that's fooled by "Peek-a-boo"...

I didn't say I supported it, just that I'd heard of it. I think it's just easier to have a regular shield and use the Feint option.

[horseboy]

lmao, "rogue-space," that rocks.

Imagine a rogue wearing the tower shield on her head like some ludicrously oversized sun hat.

"Gotta protect my skin, don't want to get burned *wink*."

lol. Imagine mounting it on swivels to your helmet. With a quick nod it slams down like a giant welding mask!

[Sucrose]

What kind of DM would give your rogue sneak attack just because he moved from his tower shield?

Unless it's an enemy that's fooled by "Peek-a-boo"...

Actually, I can see that working. If any of you have watched Ruroni Kenshin, you may recall a certain opponent who used a shield so that his opponent couldn't see where he was going to strike from. He was one of the more powerful members of the Shinsengumi.

Still, I agree that tower shields would ruin most roguely skills, so while you may be better in combat, it doesn't offset the loss of ability in most other areas, unless the fighter carries it for you or something.

[Edea]

Ah, but what if it was made of a razor thin sheet of corundum? QUITE expensive.

[Cowboy_ninja]

....well I guess I would allow it, since it actually forces evasion to make sense for once. Instead of entering "rogue-space" you duck behind the shield.

I just can't figure out why would you would want to do this. Not very rogueish in the traditional sense.


Edit: ACCURSED NINJA!
/violence!

not traditional at all. im lvl 2 rouge lvl 2 fighter. took the variant where rouge gets fighter feats instead of sneak attack. i get decent BAB,HP, Skill points, plenty of proficencies, and 7 feats!

[Cowboy_ninja]

The armor check penalty from a tower shield is -10. The armor check penalty applies to Balance, Climb, Escape Artist, Hide, Jump, Move Silently, Sleight of Hand, and Tumble checks. So most of your useful Rogue Skills will be screwed.

You could do it, but I'm not sure why you'd want to.

crap that is true i over looked that. could anyone come up with a way to get rid of the check penalty? what would it have to be made of? what feats? spells?

[leperkhaun]

make it animated. Barring that i mithrial would be your best bet of lowering the armor penelty.

[Nebo_]

Use a hide shield (ah, what a fitting name) from Sandstorm. It works like a tower shield but with only -3 ACP; masterwork it up and you've only got a -2 to hide.

[Overlard]

make it animated. Barring that i mithrial would be your best bet of lowering the armor penelty.

Animated still counts towards armour check penalties. And tower shields are wooden (unless you get the heavier & more expensive steel tower shields from a splatbook I can't remember the name of), so you can't make it out of mithral.

[RTGoodman]

You could make it out of darkwood (found here), which is sort of like mithral. As in, it lessens the shield's AC penalty by 2 and lessens the weight. Make it masterwork for another 1. So now you're only at -7 ACP.

I do believe that there are other armor/shield enhancements that lessen ACP, but I don't know what the are. Also, if you're mostly worried about the skills (Hide, Move Silently, etc.) I know that there are enhancements in the DMG/SRD that specifically give you bonuses in those skills. That might be worth taking a look at.

[Keld Denar]

You could make it out of darkwood (found here), which is sort of like mithral. As in, it lessens the shield's AC penalty by 2 and lessens the weight. Make it masterwork for another 1. So now you're only at -7 ACP.

I do believe that there are other armor/shield enhancements that lessen ACP, but I don't know what the are. Also, if you're mostly worried about the skills (Hide, Move Silently, etc.) I know that there are enhancements in the DMG/SRD that specifically give you bonuses in those skills. That might be worth taking a look at.

Anything made from expensive special materials (mithril, adamantium, darkwood, thinaun, etc) is already considered masterwork. Its in the SRD under special materials at the top of the page. The -1 from MW is already included in the -2 from darkwood. Sorry buddy.

[Techonce]

A few things:

1. 45 lbs is alot of weight. Kind of hard to be a roge carring around the door to the kitchen.

2. If you have total cover, can you see the other person? I wouldn't think so. If you can't see them then you can't make precision attacks against them.

3. If a person uses a tower shield for total cover, you can do all sorts of things to them since they are unable to make attacks. My favorite is disarming them of their shield. It's not easy, but they don't get to make attacks of oppertunity!

4. The -2 to all attacks kind of bites too.

[Citizen Joe]

There are several EXTREME penalties involved in this.
1) You cannot hide while being observed, even casually. That should be enough for any DM to slap you for trying the stunt.
2) A lenient DM would allow you to bluff then hide (but that is at a -10 penalty for moving fast)
3) Given a comparable, suitable opponent, you're looking at about a 12 to 16 point differential between your hiding check and the observer's spot check. I think that was somewhere around 90% chance you'll be spotted, and they can take a move action for an extra chance at spotting you.
4) The total cover granted by the shield does not apply to spells. The spellcaster can target you by targeting the shield. To me, that says you're not really hiding. Refer back to number 1.

[Person_Man]

crap that is true i over looked that. could anyone come up with a way to get rid of the check penalty? what would it have to be made of? what feats? spells?

I would suggest that you just use a regular mithral heavy shield. This will give you most of the armor bonus, but with almost none of the penalties of a tower shield.

Getting concealment is a great idea. But using a tower shield is a poor way to do it. The simplest way is to simply buy a Ring or Wand of Invisibility and use it when you need it. Or simply ask a friend to cast it on you.

Or you could dip one level into Warlock or Dragonfire Adept and take the Blend into Shadows feat (Drow of the Underdark). This gives you Hide in Plain Site as a Swift action.

[Indon]

The armor check penalty from a tower shield is -10. The armor check penalty applies to Balance, Climb, Escape Artist, Hide, Jump, Move Silently, Sleight of Hand, and Tumble checks. So most of your useful Rogue Skills will be screwed.

You could do it, but I'm not sure why you'd want to.

Well, you don't need to use it all the time. Just keeping it in your pack entails no ACP unless the tower shield's weight encumbers you. From there, it only takes a move action to put on, which can be combined into a move just like drawing a weapon, if I recall.