D&D 5E the shield warrior - better than some think?

[Ancalagon]

I played a full campaign where I had a dex-build psi warrior with a duelist (sword and shield) style. I was a bit concerned that my damage output would simply pale vs the paladin (great weapon master and great sword) or ranger (sharpshooter and gunner).

without the GWM feat, 2 handed style is not great in 5e, but it is "the way" to do the most damage, esp comboed with PAM. However, because of dueling's +2 dmg and shield ac bonus, the gwm is the only real edge 2 handed style has.

So how did it turn out?

Well, first of all my damage was not as impressive - but I did have other ways to boost my damage. I will note, incidentally, that extra damage dice (from psi warrior, battlemaster etc) is less effective on a GWM user because the -5 penalty to hit also affect the extra damage dice, thus reducing the efficiency of the feat. I also had max attack stat sooner than the other 2 because I didn't take GWM or SS.

More importantly, my reliability was very good - 2 hits per round were the norm. The other two could dish it out but... it was swingy. One fight we obliterate, and the next we struggle because our 2 main damage dealers had a few bad rolls. This I expected, but it was a bit more drastic than I anticipated.

The other thing is ... my PC became almost immune to disadvantage. I hear a lot "oh just find a way to get advantage" as a thing for GWM users proponents, but that's not always doable, Sometimes you have disadvantage.

Near the end of the campaign, my fighter was tangling with an underwater troll of some sort (as you do at level 9) and while he could breathe under water, he did not have a swim speed, so suffered disadvantage with his weapon of choice - a sunblade. But the sunblade had +2 to hit. And with my 20 dex and level 9, my + to hit was 11. And the troll had an AC of 13... so I didn't care about disadvantage! It was a penalty yes, but a negligible one.

Did I eventually take a feat? yes - lucky

 

[Mort]

The BM fighter in my group is sword and board with protection style. LOTS of people says that's suboptimal but boy did he make it work over the life of the campaign.

 

[Mistwell]

Another advantage of sword and board is in magic items. I know magic items can sometimes be like fight club or Bruno (we don't talk about magic items). But most campaigns have them, and some of those campaigns generate random magic items. And one handed weapons are much more likely to come up than a pole arm or hand crossbow or even a greatsword. The good old reliable longsword +1 is likely to come up fairly early if you're using a published adventure. And a +1 shield comes up sometimes too.

 

[Charlaquin]

Duelist + PAM with a shield and a spear?

 

[ECMO3]

I played a full campaign where I had a dex-build psi warrior with a duelist (sword and shield) style. I was a bit concerned that my damage output would simply pale vs the paladin (great weapon master and great sword) or ranger (sharpshooter and gunner).

without the GWM feat, 2 handed style is not great in 5e, but it is "the way" to do the most damage, esp comboed with PAM. However, because of dueling's +2 dmg and shield ac bonus, the gwm is the only real edge 2 handed style has.

I think GWM is overated, it is big numbers when you hit, but in terms of averages it is not very much ahead. Combining with PAM helps, but I think PAM and Mobile will keep up pretty well with PAM and GWM, and beat it at higher ACs.

You can go sword and board with a spear or quarterstaff, PAM, Dueling and Mobile and be able to keep up pretty well with most other DPR melee builds on enemies that have a 5 foot reach (it will fall behind enemies with a longer reach).

Without PAM though you will fall behind since you lose the bonus action and reaction attacks.

That said, the issue I have always had with sword and board is spells not damage. Either I have to forgo Somatic components or take a feat or do a bunch of weapon switching that leaves you not holding a weapon. If you are playing someone with no spells though it does not matter.

Also you can use a spear without disadvantage underwater even if you don't have a swim speed.

 

[Mort]

I think GWM is overated, it is big numbers when you hit, but in terms of averages it is not very much ahead. Combining with PAM helps, but I think PAM and Mobile will keep up pretty well with PAM and GWM, and beat it at higher ACs.

You can go sword and board with a spear or quarterstaff, PAM, Dueling and Mobile and be able to keep up pretty well with most other DPR melee builds on enemies that have a 5 foot reach (it will fall behind enemies with a longer reach).

Also you can use a spear without disadvantage underwater even if you don't have a swim speed.

GWM is one of those feats that can very easily be suboptimal if not played JUST right. But people like it when it hits big - so often ignore that aspect.

 

[Shiroiken]

Sword and board is a much better fighting style than most give it credit for. With bounded accuracy, that +2 AC is really solid throughout the character's career. The only major issue I've seen occur is during an ambush, when it takes an entire action to don. My group has houseruled it to be a bonus action, finding it to be perfectly balanced.

 

[Lojaan]

People use the bonus attack from PAM while using a shield in the other hand...? Man that is some dodgy cheese right there.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

People use the bonus attack from PAM while using a shield in the other hand...? Man that is some dodgy cheese right there.

They do, and it is. Gorgonzola.

 

[Iry]

Another advantage of sword and board is in magic items. I know magic items can sometimes be like fight club or Bruno (we don't talk about magic items). But most campaigns have them, and some of those campaigns generate random magic items. And one handed weapons are much more likely to come up than a pole arm or hand crossbow or even a greatsword. The good old reliable longsword +1 is likely to come up fairly early if you're using a published adventure. And a +1 shield comes up sometimes too.

While I acknowledge that 5E can be played without magic items, I think the bare minimum is a magic weapon somewhere around Tier 2 to deal with all those enemies resistant to nonmagical weapons. And that usually comes in the form of a +1.

The BM fighter in my group is sword and board with protection style. LOTS of people says that's suboptimal but boy did he make it work over the life of the campaign.

It can also be a little self-fulfilling. The mere presence of a character with GWM means the GM can happily include more low AC / high HP enemies for them to enjoy killing.