Tower Shields - useful?

[AuraSeer]

Does anyone actually carry a tower shield in 3.5? Total cover is clearly a useful option to have, and the AC bonus of +2 (compared to a heavy shield) is very significant at lower levels. But the -2 penalty to all attack rolls seems like a rather painful tradeoff to make.

Now that even animated shields inflict their penalties on the user, is using a tower shield ever worth the trouble?

 

[Christian]

I thought about it-the attack penalty combined with the AC bonus is equivalent to 'always-on' Combat Expertise, without having to burn a feat (if you're a Fighter, of course). But I found the encumbrance and armor check penalty to be more of a detriment than I expected, & dropped the idea ...

 

[CalrinAlshaw]

In games I normally play in, Tower shields tend to be improvised more often than not or a magical item with size-alteration magic.

Tables, doors, stuff like this make good tower shields if ya got a couple pitons and a bit of rope.

Calrin

 

[Deset Gled]

I think it's kind of sad that Fighters are now the only class that has proficiency with them without spending a feat on it. The two classes that I always thought got the greates benefit from them were Bards and Clerics. Also, the fact that they no longer provide cover from spells hurts a lot.

Put all of this together, and I come to the conclusion that I'll be seeing a lot fewer tower shields being carried.

 

[Nail]

Does anyone actually carry a tower shield in 3.5? Total cover is clearly a useful option to have, and the AC bonus of +2 (compared to a heavy shield) is very significant at lower levels. But the -2 penalty to all attack rolls seems like a rather painful tradeoff to make.

D&D is almost always about offense. The harder you hit, the more likely you'll live through an encounter. Only occasionally does that truism take a back seat...and then the feat Combat Expertise is useful. Thing is, the feat can be turned on or off. The tower shield...well, it can't.

Don't bother with the tower shield. Not unless yer a cleric...and then ye won't have the strength or feats t' use it.

 

[Darklone]

Used them a lot for the first row (plus fighting defensively) in soldiers fighting formations. Loved the look of the players when they missed.

 

[Stalker0]

The key to consider is the ability to gain total cover. There's a ton of situations I can think of where I'm a fighter in the front lines and would love to weave my way back to the cleric without getting my bell rung by the enemy. Also, things like running up against arrows and the like make the shield useful. And you can turn it off, just drop the shield.

 

[Darklone]

And don't forget that Expertise has a cap of +5.

If your frontline fighter really wants to go AC crazy, fighting defensively, tumble 5 ranks, tower shield and full expertise help a lot even against big monsters.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I read (past tense) it as useful in that a fighter can choose to take total cover when, say, a dragon breathes on him, and thus avoid the effect of the breath. Basically the total cover gives a nonmagical protective option against area affect damage if the fighter is savvy enough.

Sure, it doesn't protect you against directly targetted spells (and it never has), but do you think my interpretation above is incorrect?

Cheers