Generally, no. You'd need one hand to hold the shield. According to the PHB:
Two-Handed. This weapon requires two hands when you attack with it. This property is relevant only when you attack with the weapon, not when you simply hold it.
You could hold the weapon with a shield, but not attack with it as it requires two hands to swing.
The thing is you can hold a two handed sword in real life with one hand but you won't have any speed accuracy or power to any strike so technically you could theoretically but the rulebook disssalows it because 1. it is silly and 2. Taking a shield is supposed to be a trade off of more defense for less damage than taking a 2 hander or dual wielding.
The decisions are a balance mechanic in a game that is rules by numbers and dice. If you want the benefit of the higher attack power offered by bigger weapons or dual-wielding then you sacrifice the use of a shield.
yes also if you doing home brew you might be able to fit it in where the shield is strapped to your arm so u dont have to hold it other than that you probably cant
No, and it would be nigh on impossible IRL as well. Two handed swords are balanced differently than one handed weapons, with a lot of weight forward, even though it has a long handle. That handle is made for two hands to lend balance. Without that balance it is all but useless. An enemy would just about have to throw himself/herself on it if it was wielded one handed. Now, a larger creature, like an ogre, could use a two handed sword one handed because of their size and the size of their fist.
The shield "strapping" won't work either as it takes up valuable spatial real estate necessary for handling the weapon. If effect trying to juggle a two handed weapon and a shield should disadvantage your ability to attack and defend (disadvantage on the weapon, not sure what drawback should be assigned to AC). It should only be used if you have one of those "chickenhawk" villains who's had others fighter their battles instead of doing their own dirty work take arms to defend himself in such a ludicrous fashion. It's there where some characters with a code debate whether they should just kill the victim or are honor bound to save themselves from the dishonor of dueling the ridiculous.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I've heard of a homebrew buckler type shield, that only gives a +1 to AC, strapped to an arm. It ends up being smaller, and it's less "precise" than a shield held in the hand, so less protection.
You need valid options for a choice to be interesting. If you could wield a 2d6 sword with a shield, it ruins the current balance between two-handers vs. sword and board vs. dual wielding. These all have trade-offs that make the choice interesting. Making one option markedly better is not doing yourself any favors.
Realistically people have used a strap on shield with a two-handed weapon. Although it is to be noted this was primary for using a two-handed spear and shield- not so much giant swords. It's probably possible though, and I'm willing to bet at least one person has tried it out. Not entirely sure how effective it would be though.
Balance-wise it would be a absolute mess if you could use a two-handed weapon and a shield. So, no in D&D you physically cannot attack with a two-handed weapon no matter what type of shield you have. It's a game not a realism simulator.
Check out my Disabled & Dragons Youtube Channel for 5e Monster and Player Tactics. Helping the Disabled Community and Players and DM’s (both new and experienced) get into D&D. Plus there is a talking Dragon named Quill.
If you're strapping a shield to your arm, what you're effectively doing is wearing a heavier suit of armor- you're turning a breastplate into a suit of half plate. A shield isn't just a hunk of metal or wood you passively hide behind, to use it effectively you need to actually move it to intercept enemy attacks and you can't do that while you're swinging a two-handed sword around.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Im running a LMOP campaign and i'm allowing my fighter to do so, he uses a greatsword and a shield. The thing is, He is an Eldritch Knight Fighter and i let him bond with his shield. So everytime he attacks he drops de the shield on the floor, performs his attack then summon it back to his hands with a bonus action. I don't think this breaks any rules. And for sure is not breaking our game
Im running a LMOP campaign and i'm allowing my fighter to do so, he uses a greatsword and a shield. The thing is, He is an Eldritch Knight Fighter and i let him bond with his shield. So everytime he attacks he drops de the shield on the floor, performs his attack then summon it back to his hands with a bonus action. I don't think this breaks any rules. And for sure is not breaking our game
Definitely do whatever you want at your own table, but it does break rules: it takes an action to drop a shield to the floor, so you can't do it and attack in the same turn.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If a character is wielding a shield, can they also be using two-handed weapons like greatswords?
"Halt your wagging and wag your halters, for I am mastercryomancer!"
Check out my Expanded Signature
Generally, no. You'd need one hand to hold the shield. According to the PHB:
Two-Handed. This weapon requires two hands when you attack with it. This property is relevant only when you attack with the weapon, not when you simply hold it.
You could hold the weapon with a shield, but not attack with it as it requires two hands to swing.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
― Oscar Wilde.
The thing is you can hold a two handed sword in real life with one hand but you won't have any speed accuracy or power to any strike so technically you could theoretically but the rulebook disssalows it because 1. it is silly and 2. Taking a shield is supposed to be a trade off of more defense for less damage than taking a 2 hander or dual wielding.
The decisions are a balance mechanic in a game that is rules by numbers and dice. If you want the benefit of the higher attack power offered by bigger weapons or dual-wielding then you sacrifice the use of a shield.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
yes also if you doing home brew you might be able to fit it in where the shield is strapped to your arm so u dont have to hold it other than that you probably cant
No, and it would be nigh on impossible IRL as well. Two handed swords are balanced differently than one handed weapons, with a lot of weight forward, even though it has a long handle. That handle is made for two hands to lend balance. Without that balance it is all but useless. An enemy would just about have to throw himself/herself on it if it was wielded one handed. Now, a larger creature, like an ogre, could use a two handed sword one handed because of their size and the size of their fist.
The shield "strapping" won't work either as it takes up valuable spatial real estate necessary for handling the weapon. If effect trying to juggle a two handed weapon and a shield should disadvantage your ability to attack and defend (disadvantage on the weapon, not sure what drawback should be assigned to AC). It should only be used if you have one of those "chickenhawk" villains who's had others fighter their battles instead of doing their own dirty work take arms to defend himself in such a ludicrous fashion. It's there where some characters with a code debate whether they should just kill the victim or are honor bound to save themselves from the dishonor of dueling the ridiculous.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
You sure can
Just as soon as Dr. Vaclav gets that third arm sewn to your torso, might experience some weird side effects but hey +2 AC!
The only way is to hold your two-hander in one hand while you toss your Animated Shield up as a bonus action.
I've heard of a homebrew buckler type shield, that only gives a +1 to AC, strapped to an arm. It ends up being smaller, and it's less "precise" than a shield held in the hand, so less protection.
Or, just wear a Ring of Protection.
You need valid options for a choice to be interesting. If you could wield a 2d6 sword with a shield, it ruins the current balance between two-handers vs. sword and board vs. dual wielding. These all have trade-offs that make the choice interesting. Making one option markedly better is not doing yourself any favors.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Realistically people have used a strap on shield with a two-handed weapon. Although it is to be noted this was primary for using a two-handed spear and shield- not so much giant swords. It's probably possible though, and I'm willing to bet at least one person has tried it out. Not entirely sure how effective it would be though.
Balance-wise it would be a absolute mess if you could use a two-handed weapon and a shield. So, no in D&D you physically cannot attack with a two-handed weapon no matter what type of shield you have. It's a game not a realism simulator.
Edit: minor grammar
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
Only if you have more than 2 hands
Check out my Disabled & Dragons Youtube Channel for 5e Monster and Player Tactics. Helping the Disabled Community and Players and DM’s (both new and experienced) get into D&D. Plus there is a talking Dragon named Quill.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPPmyTI0tZ6nM-bzY0IG3ww
If you're strapping a shield to your arm, what you're effectively doing is wearing a heavier suit of armor- you're turning a breastplate into a suit of half plate. A shield isn't just a hunk of metal or wood you passively hide behind, to use it effectively you need to actually move it to intercept enemy attacks and you can't do that while you're swinging a two-handed sword around.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Im running a LMOP campaign and i'm allowing my fighter to do so, he uses a greatsword and a shield.
The thing is, He is an Eldritch Knight Fighter and i let him bond with his shield.
So everytime he attacks he drops de the shield on the floor, performs his attack then summon it back to his hands with a bonus action.
I don't think this breaks any rules. And for sure is not breaking our game
Definitely do whatever you want at your own table, but it does break rules: it takes an action to drop a shield to the floor, so you can't do it and attack in the same turn.