Darkwood shields as weapons

[Mark Moreland]

Given that the weight of a heavy darkwood shield is equivalent to that of a standard light wooden shield, and that it has less of an armor check penalty, is it reasonable to assume that one could wield one as a light off-hand weapon using TWF, Imp. Shield Bash, etc?

[DM_Blake]

I would say yes.

When it comes to bludgeoning weapons, the damage you do and the ease with which you can wield them are both almost entirely just a factor of the weight of the item. Since its weight is comparable to that of a light shield, I would say it would be wielded as one.

On the other hand (no pun intended), the aerodynamics are that of a larger shield, so it might be somewhat slower, the way a larger shield is slower, but I think this is a minor consideration next to that of the weight.

[Mark Moreland]

DM_Blake wrote:

I would say yes.

When it comes to bludgeoning weapons, the damage you do and the ease with which you can wield them are both almost entirely just a factor of the weight of the item. Since its weight is comparable to that of a light shield, I would say it would be wielded as one.

On the other hand (no pun intended), the aerodynamics are that of a larger shield, so it might be somewhat slower, the way a larger shield is slower, but I think this is a minor consideration next to that of the weight.

So would you also say that it should do damage like a light shield (1d3) and just provide the higher shield bonus to AC, or still do the 1d4 and consider the extra 100gp cost to balance out the higher damage dice without the larger TWF penalty?

[DM_Blake]

yoda8myhead wrote:

DM_Blake wrote:

I would say yes.

When it comes to bludgeoning weapons, the damage you do and the ease with which you can wield them are both almost entirely just a factor of the weight of the item. Since its weight is comparable to that of a light shield, I would say it would be wielded as one.

On the other hand (no pun intended), the aerodynamics are that of a larger shield, so it might be somewhat slower, the way a larger shield is slower, but I think this is a minor consideration next to that of the weight.

So would you also say that it should do damage like a light shield (1d3) and just provide the higher shield bonus to AC, or still do the 1d4 and consider the extra 100gp cost to balance out the higher damage dice without the larger TWF penalty?

I think I already did state that I would have it do damage as a light shield. Pound for pound, it is a light shield, it weighs what a light shield weighs, so it impacts like a light shield, so it damages like a light shield.

The extra gold was for the lower weight (some low-STR characters might really appreciate that), the lower armor check penalty, and for the biggest benefit of getting +2 AC with a light shield (instead of the normal +1 a light shield should provide).

The upside is that it counts as a light weapon, so you can use Two-Weapon Fighting much easier. The downside is that it does less damage. All in all, I would say the extra 100 GP was worth the benefit package.

[James Risner]

yoda8myhead wrote:

So would you also say that it should do damage like a light shield (1d3) and just provide the higher shield bonus to AC, or still do the 1d4 and consider the extra 100gp cost to balance out the higher damage dice without the larger TWF penalty?

I would either do RAW (damage like heavy, TWF penalties like heavy) or house rule (damage like a light shield, TWF penalties like light) but never a mix of the two. Especially not for 100 gp or 1000 gp in a non-magical item.

The weapons we have are derived from thousands of years of "perfecting the best items" and there isn't a non-magical alternate way to make a Greatsword that deals 99d6 damage. ;-)