flat-footed: does your shield bonus to AC apply?

[atom crash]

Does a flat-footed opponent count his shield bonus to AC, or must he be actively using his shield in order to receive the bonus? In other words, if a person is flat-footed how effective is his shield? Is it by default in place and ready to deflect blows, or is it just a plank of wood (or sheet of metal) hanging ineffectively by his side?

I thought I remembered reading somewhere that a flat-footed opponent doesn't count his shield bonus to AC, but now I can't find any reference to this.

 

[Dr_Rictus]

You can't find any reference because it's not so. Only the Dex (and hence, Dodge) bonus to AC is lost when you're flat-footed.

 

[shilsen]

What the good doctor said.

 

[Nail]

It may be "unrealistic", but I think the idea was to keep the idea of a shield viable in 3.0e.

 

[beeber]

has anyone house-ruled that away, and with what results?

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

It may be "unrealistic", but I think the idea was to keep the idea of a shield viable in 3.0e.

"Shieldless AC" is in 1e/2e. Not 3e.

The RAW for shields is geared towards playability and completely punts on realism.

The measly +2 AC bonus for a large shield gives is laughably small even if the wielder mindlessly lets the shield linger in front of chest. In the hands of a trained soldier, a shield is employed actively both to aid defense AND offense. A static bonus is completely wrong here.

OTOH I still get my full shield bonus against every single attack even if I am blindfolded, flatfooted, stunned, and set upon by a thousand archers sniping me from every direction as well as 20 goblins with polearms.

A realistic option would be complicated and slow (some kind of opposed BAB check, perhaps). On the balance, the rules as is are close enough to fair and so easy to use that I am not motivated to go for a realistic option.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

has anyone house-ruled that away, and with what results?

Improved Initiative becomes more valuable. Not only can you be flatfooted from Initiative, but surprise too. It would be a big hit to front line classes that lack Spot and Listen. The Rogues would be drooling. At low-mid levels they sometimes have trouble hitting the tin cans, even on the surprise round.

As a player of a Paladin with a modest Dex who gets surprised and caught flatfooted all the time, I know what I would do with such a change... The result would be those sword & boarders with low Dex would give up their shield and join the horde of screaming two-hand weapon wielders.

 

[Darklone]

Perhaps you think about the three skull variant in Grim Tales. There you lose your shield bonus to AC when flat-footed.

There may be some other variant d20 rulessets with this rule.

 

[Li Shenron]

It could be house ruled the other way, and it would probably make some sense, since most of the shield protection requires active use of it (although it may occasionally block an attack even if you are just keeping the shield stripped to the arm). I think this is one case where simplicity of the rule is overall better than realism, however.

 

[Saeviomagy]

It could be house ruled the other way, and it would probably make some sense, since most of the shield protection requires active use of it...

Of course if you're doing that, a large shield should probably count for more than 1/4 cover.