Are you just able to use shields?

[grizo]

I have read through a good portion of the book and I haven't found where it says you can use shields. Are we just suppose to assume we can pick up a shield and use it?

[Kyrone]

Yes everyone can use shields and use a action to raise it and gain the AC, but you don't get the reaction without the feat.

[Eltacolibre]

to add to that:

For offense, shields are considered martial weapons (but guessing not the main concern of people using shields).

[grizo]

Kyrone wrote:

Yes everyone can use shields and use a action to raise it and gain the AC, but you don't get the reaction without the feat.

Where does it say that? or is it just implied?

[Eltacolibre]

grizo wrote:

Kyrone wrote:

Yes everyone can use shields and use a action to raise it and gain the AC, but you don't get the reaction without the feat.

Where does it say that? or is it just implied?

Shield section p. 277.

The raise action is mentioned on p.277 but more details of the action is found on p. 472.

You cannot use Shield Block without a class feat or a feat granting you the ability.

[HammerJack]

The raise a shield action is on 472. It does not require any special ability.

Shield block is gained by some classes, or as a feat on 266. It is a special ability.

There is not a line in a location that comes immediately to mind saying "there is no shield proficiency." There just isn't a shield proficiency to require.

[grizo]

HammerJack wrote:

There is not a line in a location that comes immediately to mind saying "there is no shield proficiency." There just isn't a shield proficiency to require.

That is a weird design decision. But I assumed it was the case. I feel like mentioning it some where would have been a way better idea.

[tivadar27]

Hmm, I don't mind this, but I also don't really understand the point of the Shield spell with this being the case... Sure, you can block with it once every 10 minutes. Doesn't really seem worth it, particulary when it grants a +1 vs +2 AC.

[Eltacolibre]

The small amount of AC from the Shield is nice but honestly, Shield Block is more important than the circumstance bonus to AC. The spell shield also doesn't care if it gets broken, unlike a regular shield.

[ElfCabbage]

And imagine using the shield spell AND a shield simultaneously. +3 AC is a good boost. It almost makes it possible to play the Gladiator Bard. Almost.

[HammerJack]

Those don't stack.

[David knott 242]

tivadar27 wrote:

Hmm, I don't mind this, but I also don't really understand the point of the Shield spell with this being the case... Sure, you can block with it once every 10 minutes. Doesn't really seem worth it, particulary when it grants a +1 vs +2 AC.

Having the shield rather than you take the damage is a bigger deal than the small bonus to AC.

[Ageron]

grizo wrote:

HammerJack wrote:

There is not a line in a location that comes immediately to mind saying "there is no shield proficiency." There just isn't a shield proficiency to require.

That is a weird design decision. But I assumed it was the case. I feel like mentioning it some where would have been a way better idea.

Things that are proficiencies are indicated in ancestries/classes/feats. The book is like 640 pages, I don't think there was enough room to list things that don't have proficiencies. And don't see the point, since the untrained bonus is +0 anyway it would have no impact on the math.

[David knott 242]

I think they eliminated shield proficiency so that there would be no way to add your level to your AC twice.

[Paradozen]

tivadar27 wrote:

Hmm, I don't mind this, but I also don't really understand the point of the Shield spell with this being the case... Sure, you can block with it once every 10 minutes. Doesn't really seem worth it, particulary when it grants a +1 vs +2 AC.

Saves you on bulk, for groups that care, scales the hardness for free instead of requiring money to get magical shields, you recharge shield free instead of repairing it, and you can block magic missile.

[Malk_Content]

Paradozen wrote:

tivadar27 wrote:

Hmm, I don't mind this, but I also don't really understand the point of the Shield spell with this being the case... Sure, you can block with it once every 10 minutes. Doesn't really seem worth it, particulary when it grants a +1 vs +2 AC.

Saves you on bulk, for groups that care, scales the hardness for free instead of requiring money to get magical shields, you recharge shield free instead of repairing it, and you can block magic missile.

Also as a verbal only spell,requires no hands.

[jRocket]

Is dual-wielding shields allowed? Can I attack with a shield and then use two raise shield actions? Would the AC bonus stack? Would the speed penalty stack? If I use Shield Block, do I get to choose which shield takes damage?

[HammerJack]

Wielding to shields, sure.

Attack with a shield, them raise a shield, sure.

Alternate which shield you block with as they take damage, yes.

Gaining a stacking bonus by using 2 raise shield actions, no.

[tivadar27]

Eltacolibre wrote:

The small amount of AC from the Shield is nice but honestly, Shield Block is more important than the circumstance bonus to AC. The spell shield also doesn't care if it gets broken, unlike a regular shield.

Actually I'm fairly convinced this is incorrect, though I haven't run the numbers. A +2 AC bonus for the entire battle vs a +1 AC bonus and the ability to prevent 10 damage once (once you shield block with the spell, you can't cast it again for 10 minutes...).

Either way, without actually running the numbers, I don't think either of us can make definitive statements here.

[tivadar27]

Also: Note the rise of the Shield Monk build :-P. Seriously, now that Shield's don't have proficiency associated with them, RAW monks can use them with unarmored defense.

[Paradozen]

Malk_Content wrote:

Paradozen wrote:

tivadar27 wrote:

Hmm, I don't mind this, but I also don't really understand the point of the Shield spell with this being the case... Sure, you can block with it once every 10 minutes. Doesn't really seem worth it, particulary when it grants a +1 vs +2 AC.

Saves you on bulk, for groups that care, scales the hardness for free instead of requiring money to get magical shields, you recharge shield free instead of repairing it, and you can block magic missile.

Also as a verbal only spell,requires no hands.

And it appears to grant the shield block reaction, which you would need a feat for otherwise.

[Vlorax]

tivadar27 wrote:

Also: Note the rise of the Shield Monk build :-P. Seriously, now that Shield's don't have proficiency associated with them, RAW monks can use them with unarmored defense.

Yep and Brawling Focus for Monks now gives the crit spec of whatever Monk wep they're wielding. So a Monk can use a shield + Mountain Stance (a stance that doesn't force specific attacks) with a katana, or nunchaku and flurry with it.

[lordcirth]

tivadar27 wrote:

Eltacolibre wrote:

The small amount of AC from the Shield is nice but honestly, Shield Block is more important than the circumstance bonus to AC. The spell shield also doesn't care if it gets broken, unlike a regular shield.

Actually I'm fairly convinced this is incorrect, though I haven't run the numbers. A +2 AC bonus for the entire battle vs a +1 AC bonus and the ability to prevent 10 damage once (once you shield block with the spell, you can't cast it again for 10 minutes...).

Either way, without actually running the numbers, I don't think either of us can make definitive statements here.

Depends, are you wielding a two-handed Maul like Kaliban? Shield being verbal is quite handy.