D&D 5E Using a shield as an 'improvised weapon' while retaining the AC bonus

[Scorpio616]

No. Shields are not weapons. If they were that would screw over every fighter with Dueling fighting style. Shields are certainly not Light Weapons either.

 

[77IM]

No because it is not in hand and that is part of using a shield, nothing about not gaining the AC bonus if you attack with it.

My point was, if you attack with a shield are you also wearing it?

Changing your AC up every round because you shield bash or not is going against the grain of 5e.

Nah, it's no worse than +2 for half cover, +5 for full cover.

If you're shield bashing every other round then something is wrong. Shields are not weapons and their primary purpose is to grant AC and their primary drawback is that you can't use that hand for stuff like holding a weapon.

If a "shield bash" is a main-hand attack, then sure, let them keep the AC bonus because the only reason you'd ever do that is if you were disarmed and a shield was better than a fist. If it's a bonus off-hand attack via TWF, that seems like you are getting "something for nothing" and every single shield-user is going to bashing every round, and that seems against the grain of 5e to me.

 

[MoutonRustique]

No because it is not in hand and that is part of using a shield, nothing about not gaining the AC bonus if you attack with it.

Shields.
A shield is made from wood or metal and is carried in one hand. Wielding a shield increases your Armor Class by 2. You can benefit from only one shield at a time.


AC in 5e is supposed to be simple, there is no flat footed AC or touch AC, if you are unconscious you still add your dexterity modifier to your AC, they do this to make it simple. Changing your AC up every round because you shield bash or not is going against the grain of 5e.

My point was, if you attack with a shield are you also wearing it?

I would say that if you are attacking with a shield, you are most definitely wielding it.

*The emphasis is mine.

[snip]
If a "shield bash" is a main-hand attack, then sure, let them keep the AC bonus because the only reason you'd ever do that is if you were disarmed and a shield was better than a fist. If it's a bonus off-hand attack via TWF, that seems like you are getting "something for nothing" and every single shield-user is going to bashing every round, and that seems against the grain of 5e to me.

To each is own (of course), but I'd say that, yes, attacking with your shield every round is a good idea - but it is hardly free. Your bonus action may very well have a multitude of options contending for application (I do concede : perhaps not at the lower levels.) Making a 1d4 bludgeoning damage attack (possibly w/ disadvantage to boot) will not often be the best use of this very limited resource.

[snidness]This is the fun part everyone* seems to laud so much about 5e - the vagueness of the rules. There is no obviously better answer and all situations will "make more sense" than the other to someone. Yipi, so much fun.[/snidness]

 

[was]

I'd let them use it as an improvised weapon, but not retain the AC bonus. That being said, an 'improvised' weapon is not one that you are trained in using. I can't see the argument that you can step out of the defensive fighting stance utilized by sword and board fighters, attack with the shield as an 'improvised' weapon and then recover fully to that defensive stance in a single round.

 

[Paraxis]

If it's a bonus off-hand attack via TWF, that seems like you are getting "something for nothing" and every single shield-user is going to bashing every round, and that seems against the grain of 5e to me.

It would be an improvised weapon, so without the tavern brawler feat no proficiency bonus to hit.
It would do 1d4 damage, and you would need to invest in the dual wielder feat to use it since it is not a light weapon.
It uses up your bonus action for the round.

With the proper sword and board feat of shield master,as a bonus action you can shove which is way better than 1d4 damage most of the time, since you give all your regular attacks advantage and some of your allies, after you knock the target prone.

So you need a feat to use a non light shield off hand, that doesn't sound like something for nothing, with that feat you could have a d8 weapon instead, so again a damage drop after you spend a feat.

 

[77IM]

To each is own (of course), but I'd say that, yes, attacking with your shield every round is a good idea - but it is hardly free. Your bonus action may very well have a multitude of options contending for application (I do concede : perhaps not at the lower levels.) Making a 1d4 bludgeoning damage attack (possibly w/ disadvantage to boot) will not often be the best use of this very limited resource.

A good idea for the character, or a good idea for the game? If the party is fighting eight hobgoblins who each have a sword and shield, would it be a good idea to let those hobgoblins each take an extra (inaccurate, low-damage) attack each round?

Even at high levels, martial characters often won't have a useful bonus action available, so they should be shield-bashing a LOT. I don't think such a common game situation would have been left out of the PHB if the rules were meant to support it. Shield bash could be defined as one line of text if were an essential part of "the D&D experience."

Caveat: if you take the Dual Wielder feat in order to do TWF with your shield as a non-light improvised weapon, I'd be totally fine with that. It cost you an important character resource and is a special case.

 

[MoutonRustique]

I'd let them use it as an improvised weapon, but not retain the AC bonus. That being said, an 'improvised' weapon is not one that you are trained in using. I can't see the argument that you can step out of the defensive fighting stance utilized by sword and board fighters, attack with the shield as an 'improvised' weapon and then recover fully to that defensive stance in a single round.

My friend, I suggest you go out on field with a few buddies, grab some wooden swords and boards and then have one of them hit you with a shield - perhaps a classic "shoulder check" to the chest or side.
1 - it will be very fun for your buddies
2 - you will most certainly notice that your shield-wielding friend will have a good deal more ease getting back into a position to meaningfully use his shield as you will to get into a position to strike effectively at him.

This is meant as a humorous proposition that there are other ways of defending yourself with a shield other than turtling behind it.

But seriously, you should try it sometime - it is quite fun!

 

[MoutonRustique]

A good idea for the character, or a good idea for the game? If the party is fighting eight hobgoblins who each have a sword and shield, would it be a good idea to let those hobgoblins each take an extra (inaccurate, low-damage) attack each round?

Even at high levels, martial characters often won't have a useful bonus action available, so they should be shield-bashing a LOT. I don't think such a common game situation would have been left out of the PHB if the rules were meant to support it. Shield bash could be defined as one line of text if were an essential part of "the D&D experience."

Caveat: if you take the Dual Wielder feat in order to do TWF with your shield as a non-light improvised weapon, I'd be totally fine with that. It cost you an important character resource and is a special case.

You are quite correct in terms of the implications for the game.

I was mistaken in my interpretation of your second statement - the rules do prohibit the use non-light weapons as off-hands. I assumed you were talking in the instance where using a non-light weapon would be possible.

Two side-related things I've noticed about the consequences of "TWF as a bonus attack" :
1 - the bizarre wonkyness of unarmed attacks created by their being - not punches, but punches, but not really punches, but yeah...
2 - why does everyone* assume people are not trained with shields as weapons?

With regards to point -2-, if a big (I'll concede, worked) piece of wood deals 1d6 damage and can be wielded with proficiency, I am always baffled why a sturdy, often metal-studded, slab of wood of crucial importance to many fighting people is never trained with for anything other than turtling and, when you really, really study it, (and then only in some worlds - as feats are optional) pushing.

 

[Jaelommiss]

With regards to point -2-, if a big (I'll concede, worked) piece of wood deals 1d6 damage and can be wielded with proficiency, I am always baffled why a sturdy, often metal-studded, slab of wood of crucial importance to many fighting people is never trained with for anything other than turtling and, when you really, really study it, (and then only in some worlds - as feats are optional) pushing.

I've always wondered this myself. For my games I would allow a shield to be used as a melee weapon for an attack action. I would still allow it to grant AC.

If I were to add it to the weapon chart I would place it under Martial Melee weapons:

Shield, 10gp, 1d4 bludgeoning, 6 lb., Heavy, Special*
Bossed (is that a word?) Shield, 40gp, 1d6 bludgeoning, 8 lb., Heavy, Special*

*Grants the wielder +2 AC if proficient in shields as armour, cannot be used as a weapon for two weapon fighting or for the Dual Wielder feat

 

[was]

My friend, I suggest you go out on field with a few buddies, grab some wooden swords and boards and then have one of them hit you with a shield - perhaps a classic "shoulder check" to the chest or side.
1 - it will be very fun for your buddies
2 - you will most certainly notice that your shield-wielding friend will have a good deal more ease getting back into a position to meaningfully use his shield as you will to get into a position to strike effectively at him.

This is meant as a humorous proposition that there are other ways of defending yourself with a shield other than turtling behind it.

But seriously, you should try it sometime - it is quite fun!

..No, I have not gone the SCA route with the wooden swords. I have, however, had the opportunity to swing a sword in full chainmail with a metal shield. Being untrained, I was quickly knocked on my backside sparring against a trained opponent.
..Shields are not the light little things players like to imagine them being. Most of them are not particularly light. Using the shield as a weapon will unbalance you if you are not trained in using it as such. Note the 'improvised' portion of the discussion.
...I would have to disagree with the assertion that an untrained shield fighter would be able to make that attack and recover their stance in a single attack action. Maybe a full-round action.
...Unless I misread the OP, we're not talking about a simple shoulder check to gain advantage of position. We're talking about a heavy strike with the wielders full strength behind it designed to do actual physical damage to an opponent. I tend to see that more of a swinging type of motion of the arm rather than a more economic pushing type of movement.