Classic D&D: In Defence of the Shield

Blackleaf · February 05, 2009, 12:45:53 PM

Thanks to everyone who's offered some constructive feedback on this house-rule so far. I posted this here, Dragonsfoot, and on Twitter and the feedback has included:

* I like it
* I don't like it
* It's too powerful
* It's not powerful enough
* Add more detail
* This adds too much detail

!!!

Which I think really demonstrates how much variability in play-styles and preferences the classic D&D game supports, and the very different approaches people have to the game. I'll continue to post updates on my site (eg. the accompanying weapons stuff, alignment / languages, hit points, etc) and might add a thread here to get feedback once in a while too.

kogi.kaishakunin · February 05, 2009, 01:35:28 PM

WFRPG did exactly what you are doing. You can Parry one attack a round. You will roll a WS check if its successful than you get to roll a d6 and subtract that damage from the attack. Simple and easy for that game

kogi.kaishakunin · February 05, 2009, 01:39:02 PM

WFRPG has the easiest albeit most deadly combat system. I have used it constantly as a replacement for D&D when the D&D rules did not do something I liked.

kryyst · February 05, 2009, 01:57:13 PM

Just to clarify. I don't think shields are useless. I do think D&D's AC+1 for a shield is useless, by that same token your modification to the rule makes them even less useful then the original rules.

Blackleaf · February 05, 2009, 02:23:08 PM

Quote from: kryyst;282351Just to clarify. I don't think shields are useless. I do think D&D's AC+1 for a shield is useless, by that same token your modification to the rule makes them even less useful then the original rules.

Yeah, whatever

Cranewings · February 09, 2009, 01:14:47 AM

I think the shield in D&D is fine. You can take Shield Spec, Agile Shield Fighter, and Improved Shield Bash. With all three together, the shield is pretty sweet. If you make it all that for free, the fighter with a shield will be too good because they will just use those feats for something else.

Age of Fable · February 09, 2009, 03:16:15 AM

Quote from: Cranewings;282804I think the shield in D&D is fine. You can take Shield Spec, Agile Shield Fighter, and Improved Shield Bash. With all three together, the shield is pretty sweet. If you make it all that for free, the fighter with a shield will be too good because they will just use those feats for something else.

I think you might be talking about a different version of D&D.

Anyway, it sounds like Stuart's suggestion would lead to low-level characters using a shield, and higher-level characters using two-handed weapons (or two one-handed weapons, if you allow that)...which sort of makes sense if you think of low-level characters as more realistic and higher-level characters are more superheroic.

Blackleaf · February 09, 2009, 05:39:08 PM

Quote from: Age of Fable;282810 I think you might be talking about a different version of D&D.

Anyway, it sounds like Stuart's suggestion would lead to low-level characters using a shield, and higher-level characters using two-handed weapons (or two one-handed weapons, if you allow that)...which sort of makes sense if you think of low-level characters as more realistic and higher-level characters are more superheroic.

Heh. Yes, and yes.

The two-handed and dual weapon house-rules I'll be using are in this post: Basic D&D: Choose Your Weapon

(Also: Alignments and Alignment Languages)

Cranewings · February 09, 2009, 10:09:39 PM

My bad, I have a one track mind (:

RPGPundit · February 18, 2009, 09:51:14 PM

I think the house rule is really brilliant, and may use it the next time I run a D&D campaign!

RPGPundit

Blackleaf · February 18, 2009, 10:24:24 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit;284295I think the house rule is really brilliant, and may use it the next time I run a D&D campaign!

Thanks.

Melf · February 22, 2009, 09:50:34 AM

Well if we are concerned about the usefulness of shields being under represented in AD&D- perhaps we should also take into account weapon speeds and weapon length. And then their is the consideration of the weapon type vs armor type and how that impacts the damage wrought to the opponent. Back to shields for a second, how durable is a given shield? Do shields constructed of metal block more damage than a leather hide shield (such as a Zulu warrior). There are plenty of game systems that account for these factors (and more). To me the beauty of AD&D is the speed and simplicity. Of course the flexibility of the game is also a strong point in my opinion- the DM gets to make his own house rules!

Blackleaf · February 22, 2009, 10:43:39 AM

Quote from: Melf;285017Well if we are concerned about the usefulness of shields being under represented in AD&D- perhaps we should also take into account weapon speeds and weapon length. And then their is the consideration of the weapon type vs armor type and how that impacts the damage wrought to the opponent. Back to shields for a second, how durable is a given shield? Do shields constructed of metal block more damage than a leather hide shield (such as a Zulu warrior). There are plenty of game systems that account for these factors (and more). To me the beauty of AD&D is the speed and simplicity. Of course the flexibility of the game is also a strong point in my opinion- the DM gets to make his own house rules!

It's actually for Basic D&D (Moldvay / Mentzer). I did add some house-rules for weapon length as well as fighting with two weapons or two-handed weapons as well.

I agree - one of the best qualities of Classic D&D is that it encourages people to make the game their own - add house rules, create their own worlds, make the game the way they want it to be.