+ 1d6 is fair damage for feat, you can use all 3 types of damage

- - - giving shield Heavy Property is really bad idea because you allowing characters with great AC to use GWM. Rules of the game already allows wielder of the shield use Two--weapon fighting for this shield with Dual Wielder feat +1 more to AC and without this feat you can not technically wield this shield as a weapon if your other weapon is not light. Because of the Two-weapon fighting core combat rule. (allowing this feat at table will make two-handed weapons weaker almost useless)

+++ Edit: I changed my mind later because feat is aiming to make shield your main weapon. So you can run around with just a torch, lantern, whip or just have free hand for casting spells or some interaction “All a Hero Needs is a Shield“ 

You are talking about taking multiple feats to make that all work. If the player is willing to make that investment over several levels of play then I say have at it. A two-handed weapon gives up some AC to do more damage since they all do more than 1d6.

Yes sure but that is not my point. My point is that your feat do not follow core rules of the game. That means you can not use it without investing into these feats...

Quote from Bragnak >>

Yes sure but that is not my point. My point is that your feat do not follow core rules of the game. That means you can not use it without investing into these feats...

 I don’t really follow your argument. I wrote this feat so a player could make a PC that felt like a superhero. If they invest an entire 2 ASIs for this feat and GWM, then no biggie. If they only take this, then they only do 1d6+Str, the exact same as a mace. A greatsword will still do more damage because it is 2d6 base, only require 1 ASI for GWM, and only gives up a little AC. But if you don’t like this feat, simply don’t add it to your collection and then there’s no problemo.

Person with your feat can not wield other then light weapon in their main hand, because of the basic rules of the game. I am saying that you should improve your rule wording to make it more clear for all DMs out there :)

Also there is no reason to be mad I am simply just trying to give you feedback.

I’m not mad at all.

And why would they not be able to wield a Longsword in their other hand? They can’t use both in the same turn to make attacks without the Dual Wielder feat, but that doesn’t mean they cannot hold both. I think you have some misunderstandings about how the game works which is causing you to not understand this feat correctly.

Two-Weapon Fighting

When you take the Attack action and attack with a lightmelee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different lightmelee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.

If either weapon has the thrown property, you can throw the weapon, instead of making a melee attack with it.

Nothing about that has any restriction on holding two weapons without the light property, only restrictions on using both on the same turn. one of them to make an additional attack as a bonus action. Any PC can run around with two Longswords if they want to, they can attack with both in the same turn if they have Extra Attack, they just cannot use one to make an additional attack as a bonus action without the relevant feat.

Glad you are not mad mate :)

Here is example. Sure if you think you can explain that to player after he picks it...

"Sure Bob you can take this feat"
later
"Well sorry Bob you technicaly can not use your shield to attack as bonus action because you already attacked with your longsword"

Bob is angry now 

Specific rule overwrite general, so you can just simply add one sentence and have it done for everyone

I am collecting balanced homebrew stuff for my country DnD community so it is not just about me, that is the reason why I am too picky about rules

Quote from IamSposta >>

And why would they not be able to wield a Longsword in their other hand? 

 Well you got me there I forgot the rule only cares about attacking.
I forgot and was too lazy to open the book - guilty there :D

The point that keeps this feat balanced is that they have to take the Dual Wielder feat to use the shield to make a Bonus Action attack. That holds true even without this feat.

A shield can count as an Improvised Weapon. Any PC with the Dual Wielder feat can use their Shield to make an attack capable of doing 1d4 bludgeoning damage as a bonus action, the attack simply will not  add a PC’s proficiency bonus to the attack roll (without the Tavern Brawler feat), and will not add the PC’s Str bonus to the damage roll (without the Two-Weapon Fighting Style). None of that has anything to do with this feat.

What this feat does is:

• Grant proficiency to attacks made with a shield without needing the Tavern Brawler feat since this feat makes shields no longer “improvised weapons.”
• Increase the damage a shield can do from 1d4 to 1d6.
• Grant alternative damage types if you put spikes or blades on your shield.
• Allow a PC to make their standard attacks with a shield if they do not use a weapon that turn.
• Allow Great Weapon Master to be applicable to attacks made with a shield.

The changes you are suggesting would make this feat more powerful than I ever intended it to be. This was for players that want to hit with a shield and not carry weapons at all. That’s why it is “All a Hero Needs” because “All a Hero Needs is a Shield.” Again, I think you are misunderstanding the whole point of this. Again, if you don’t like my design, no worries, but I am not altering it to make it more powerful.

My goal is not to make it more powerful and your arguments are solid so you changed my mind.

+++ “All a Hero Needs is a Shield“ 

:D

Thank you!

I really don't think the giving heavy tag to shields makes any sense.

It so your not stuck doing 1d6 damage at 10th level. Most weapons with the heavy property weigh 6+ lbs. A shield also weighs 6 lbs. Swinging a heavy weapon and swinging a heavy shield can both throw you off balance and leave you exposed.

Thank you for your feedback, but I find it wholly appropriate that shields have the heavy property through this feat.

I've never heard of the "spiked" or "bladed" properties.

They aren’t official, but historically people would pit spikes or blades on their shields and use them as weapons all the time. 

So it is only used for this feat, and the property is gained by just putting a spike on your shield?

Basically, yeah. Unless your DM decides to make something more of it. If they want it to be more then it is.

Here, the end of this video is basically what this feat was meant to facilitate: