A quick question - what is it that your PCs are actually annoyed by - a lack of varied stats? Are they used to playing 3.5e?
You can easily describe the character as having a tower shield, knight's kite shield, round viking shield etc, without needing to give additional stats. Mostly, none of these items are essentially inferior to the others.
I do understand the attraction of additional stats though. If you use the stats you have above, I would expect every fighter & paladin in the campaign world would always use the tower shield over a standard shield - they're already at disadvantage to stealth if wearing plate, so there's no actual disadvantage.
One came over from Pathfinder, two of them have never played D&D before 5th. The complaint was about a lack of options. For weapon or armor variety, they are plenty. And many of the differences negligible. But there is only one option for shields.
This started during our most recent campaign, a group of NPC Archers prepared to fire a volley at a blue dragon swooping overhead when our fighter ordered them all to grab shields and create a 'shield wall.' This prompted the question, "What are the shields made of? If they're metal, they'd do nothing against a blue dragons lightning attack, right?"
Our fighter home brewed a Tower shield (+3 AC) though we required him to take a "Tower Shield" Feat in order to wield it in combat. He uses it often for puzzle solving and battlefield control, slamming it into the ground and leaving it to create 3/4 cover for our Bard. Blocking a doorway with the Barbarians help to prevent enemies from getting through. He was extra annoyed when we faced Lizard Folk and saw their Spike Shield attack ("A second attack and a d6 no less!")
As for the point, I wanted to give my players more options to build and play the character they built in their minds. I also had an idea to make Bucklers available to anyone who had proficiency in Simple weapons (Instead of shields) and making the Tower Shield decrease their movement speed by 5 ft.
The tower shield being +3 AC and reducing speed by 5 ft is a common homebrew variant on various sites, so probably reasonably balanced. :)
Apologies if I seemed overly negative - one of the core design philosophies for 5e was to simplify things, hence they got rid of all those different polearm versions from previous editions (I always liked those tables of stats for Glaive, Guisarme, Halberd etc) in favour of standard stats and then just roleplay it.
What this means is, you can define that Fighter A has a buckler and Fighter B has a tower shield - the stats are the same +2 AC. There are a variety of combat options that have nothing to do with stats and everything to do with the description, as you described - tower shield can be used as static cover. The buckler could be used as an improvised throwing weapon and so on.
Don't forget also that there's the Shield Master feat. You could homebrew that a shield with spikes on could inflict 1d6 damage, instead of the shove. As it's effectively an offhand attack, it doesn't gain STR bonus to damage.
Thanks. I do think we'll home brew the house rule of a +3 AC, -5 ft movement Tower Shield.
It's true that we greatly enjoy the Simplified Design of 5e. Especially with so many new players to D&D in general in our group. I was trying to limit the amount of Home Brewed content until we all had a complete handle on the core rules.
I also do enjoy coming up with role-play reasons why certain mechanics work they way they do or how weapons perform. But one of my players is quite enamored with shields. In real history and all games, he loves shields.
I miss the buckler. The idea of less AC but easier to still wield certain weapons without needing to spend an action to unstrap a shield, etc.
That would be all Light weapons, yes? The Arms and Equipment Guide--or the version I read--had Japanese chainmail sleeves that acted more or less like bucklers. Four letters, starts with k.
Sorry for the resurrection of this thread, but I want to add some things to the "every shield is the same" discussion.
D&D is awful at giving shields historical appropriate names, what they are made of and they functions (e.g. there is no "tower shield"). Names of large shields: aspis ("hoplite shield" large, concave; stripped to the arm), scutum (roman legionnaire shield of imperial times, rounded rectangular, boss held horizontally), viking/migration era round shields (center boss grip); kite shields (teardrop shaped, stripped to the arm); pavese (mostly rectangular, with a pod to get it up as cover for archers/crossbowmen). The body of the shield was made out of (laminated) wood and they were often used in formations of units. They are quite unwieldy and giving them a -5 feet to movement + 3/4 cover against ranged attacks from the front sounds like a good homebrew to me.
Names of medium sized shields: again, smaller variants of the viking era shield; heater shield (smaller variant of the kite shield from the high middle ages); typical round, strapped to the arm shields like the Scottish targe, Turkish/Persian/Indian shields and the rotella shields (concave steel shields used, e.g. in the Bolognese style of fighting in the renaissance) Those could be the "normal" +2 AC shields D&D 5e has in the PHB.
Small shields: like the buckler (held in the fist of you off-hand) Unlike the large shields, who have to be held close to the body, bucklers work with the "geometry" of the guard position you are in. The 30cm shield cover quite a lot of you body, if it is held out in front of you. In the I.33 manual it is mostly used for protecting the sword hand and controlling the enemy weapon (against counter attacks). I would keep the +2 AC, but reduce it to +1 vs. ranged attacks in homebrew content. You should also keep in mind that a buckler is very easy to carry around when stowed (hung on the belt or slit over the grip of the sword) unlike the other shields.
I wish there was a small shield that strapped to the forearm (there is definitely a name for it) so we can hold non-weapons (torch, spell focus, spell material, etc) and perform somatic components. It could have 1 AC and all magic shield variants as well.
A lot of this gets into the discussion of what type of story do you want to tell. Do you want to be a simulationist making as mechanically accurate representation of the world as with rules as you can. Do you want to be dramatic and have the rules represent a "feeling" of the world.
I too am generally a fan of 5e's simplified design, lending to the dramatic. I think some mistakes were made but overall good. 3e was much more simulationist. Every single possibility was mechanistically mapped out. This created a lot of choice but a lot of false choices. There tons of options, but 90% of them were mechanically inferior to 10%. When that is true there isn't a choice.
That said if people want more variety the main problem I have with "bucklers" making them flat out inferior. I like DxJxC's idea which allows the hand to be considered "free" for non weapons. That gives them something.
I also agree with DMGorani, D&D is terrible at historic names. I think a lot of comes from the people who wrote the game in the 70s and 80s... had less access to the historic record then we do now, and were not historians but game designers in a pre-Google age.
All that said. When players want "realism" what I think it often pushes to favor lighter armor and weapons. That's because Barbarians, Monks, Draconic Sorcerers, and Armor of Shadow all have their AC on all the time. You take the 8 Dex Fighter out of her plate mail and her AC is little better than a Zombie.
Anyone who has actually worn armor knows, it is not pleasant, at all. It's pretty easy to wear a chainshirt and 1-2 shirts (one under to protect your skin and maybe one over) for a long time as long as it's not hot out. If it is hot out and/or you are exerting yourself it get unpleasant. It's true even today: American cops often don't wear their kevlar vests on duty because it's just awful to be in.
For me when I think about simulationism I often think about how the characters act not in combat. It's very videogamy to always be in your armor, unless of course you're expecting probable immediate danger. To me this means the party's NPCs are often more numerous. As they need mules to carry their stuff and someone to look after the camp when they are adventuring. The same is true of backpacks. The party isn't going to be fighting with the 59lbs of Explorer's Pack on their back. I usually require an Action to take it off and people don't have their shields strapped to their arms while they travel.
It's also probably not appropriate to go walking around town in full armor and carrying weapons.
That said if you're going to be this kind of simulationist then you really shouldn't be using the normal random encounter charts, because it's expect that the fighter sleeps in their plate armor.
I love the idea that a buckler could still hold something in that hand. It's simple, elegant, and meets a demand.
The tower shield ideas I've seen are a bit more awkward. Adding +1 AC over a regular shield might seem small, but it's exponentially more powerful as your numbers get higher. A +3 AC shield in chainmail is a far smaller jump than +3 AC in full plate. You have to be careful that your characters don't become impossible to hit.
Try this: normally, a character hiding behind another character counts as being in half cover. Anyone hiding behind a character equipped with a Tower Shield can claim 3/4s cover instead. Since large shields were only really effective in formations (they're surprisingly quite easy to get around in one on one fights), this is also thematically much more appropriate. Giving your scrawny Rogue 3/4s cover is still a large bonus, but not game breaking, and encourages team play.
In either case, I'd have both those shields available as upgraded versions of the regular shield that players can buy from blacksmiths etc. If the players actively seek out upgraded shields, you have your answers available on request. If they don't go looking for more complex shields, then you save yourself the chaff of additional rules.
I know I'm a far more lenient DM than most of my peers, but I like to run my games in the interest of what's entertaining/fun/engaging, rather than sticking to "this is what the rules say, this is what we're doing."
I allow an item in my homebrew worlds that we call a Wing/Strap shield. It fastens to your non-dominant sleeve at the point right where your bicep meets your elbow, keeping your off-hand completely free. This allows for non-combat items, somatic components, and even two-handed weapons to be used (provided the character's proficient, of course), all while applying a +1 to AC. I usually keep it so only a handful of smiths in my worlds can properly make and sell them, but my players respect me and rarely abuse the leniency ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Making tower shield +5 AC but disadvantage on attack rolls and stealth checks might be a solution.
Permanent +5 AC would be way too strong, and as others have pointed out disadvantage on stealth is no penalty for characters who already have disadvantage from their armour (all heavy armour, most medium armours).
Stormknight has mentioned +3 AC for -5 feet of speed which seems reasonable, but also possibly a little strong. I think for a tower shield it would really need some kind "guard" mechanic as it's not really any better as a shield under normal use (the opposite actually, since they're bulkier and sometimes quite heavy) but they provide way more protection when you can properly position it.
I'd be tempted to make it a permanent +1 AC but before an attack you can see is rolled you can use your reaction to gain an additional +2 AC until the end of your next turn, during which you are reduced to half speed. If combined with half cover or three-quarters cover you use the better AC bonus, not both. Basically the idea is that the tower shield is intended for pure defence in the open, ideal for a tank, whereas a more mobile/aggressive warrior should use a normal shield since it's more flexible?
Probably too detailed for 5e though, as others said, 5e was trying to go simple.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Small shields: +1 AC and "free" hand to cast spells.Standard full action for removing the shield (it is attached to the arm by leather straps). Standard shield: +2 AC, hand used to carry shield (and here a change to something that bothers me) "free action" to drop the shield on the ground since you are holding it and not with it tied up. Large shields: equal to standard + movement penalty (-5ft) and half-coverage bonus to ranged attacks (including magic attacks) targeting you. Special:Lizardfolk shield (etc)...standard + offhand attack with no stat bonus (requires proficiency with martial "weapons").
You provide the variations your players want, don't change the armor mechanic up (which can change the game balance) as it's being restricted to something that already exists for specific situations and makes the Feat still make sense.
Obs: On the big shield, some might say that it was still too strong, so you can put the cover bonus as a reaction to a ranged attack that the player can see and that lasts until the start of the player's turn and movement speed drops to0 while he is "hiding" behind the shield.(but then the Feat starts to make less sense).
If I were to do this, I would do it very differently.
Buckler Shield: As a reaction to being attacked by a natural weapon, melee weapon or ranged weapon attack, you can roll a Dex check (d20+ Dex Modifier). If you beat their attack roll, they miss that roll, but you get no other benefit to AC versus other attacks. Can be donned or doffed as a free action.
Normal Shield: As normal.
Spiked Shield: You can choose to use this a round shield or use it as a Light weapon doing (Two weapon fighting) for 1d4 piercing damage plus your strength modifier. Takes 2 rounds to don or doff this shield as it is strapped on. Costs 50 gp and magical versions can be enchanted as EITHER a weapon (increasing to hit and damage), or a shield (increasing AC). Defender Weapon versions are common.
Tower Shield: As a Bonus Action you can take full cover against any ranged attack till the beginning of your next turn. Does nothing at all against melee attacks. Dons and Doffs as normal (1 round).
Just an alt rule idea for different shield sizes and their effects.
Buckler shield (small shield) +1 AC, requires DEX 13
Wooden round shield (medium shield) +2 AC, D&D Standard
Metal tower shield (large shield) +3 AC, requires STG 14, disadvantage on stealth checks.
What do you think? I'm trying to keep the game rather balanced but my PCs are annoyed by only one shield option.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersA quick question - what is it that your PCs are actually annoyed by - a lack of varied stats? Are they used to playing 3.5e?
You can easily describe the character as having a tower shield, knight's kite shield, round viking shield etc, without needing to give additional stats. Mostly, none of these items are essentially inferior to the others.
I do understand the attraction of additional stats though. If you use the stats you have above, I would expect every fighter & paladin in the campaign world would always use the tower shield over a standard shield - they're already at disadvantage to stealth if wearing plate, so there's no actual disadvantage.
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
One came over from Pathfinder, two of them have never played D&D before 5th. The complaint was about a lack of options. For weapon or armor variety, they are plenty. And many of the differences negligible. But there is only one option for shields.
This started during our most recent campaign, a group of NPC Archers prepared to fire a volley at a blue dragon swooping overhead when our fighter ordered them all to grab shields and create a 'shield wall.' This prompted the question, "What are the shields made of? If they're metal, they'd do nothing against a blue dragons lightning attack, right?"
Our fighter home brewed a Tower shield (+3 AC) though we required him to take a "Tower Shield" Feat in order to wield it in combat. He uses it often for puzzle solving and battlefield control, slamming it into the ground and leaving it to create 3/4 cover for our Bard. Blocking a doorway with the Barbarians help to prevent enemies from getting through. He was extra annoyed when we faced Lizard Folk and saw their Spike Shield attack ("A second attack and a d6 no less!")
As for the point, I wanted to give my players more options to build and play the character they built in their minds. I also had an idea to make Bucklers available to anyone who had proficiency in Simple weapons (Instead of shields) and making the Tower Shield decrease their movement speed by 5 ft.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersThe tower shield being +3 AC and reducing speed by 5 ft is a common homebrew variant on various sites, so probably reasonably balanced. :)
Apologies if I seemed overly negative - one of the core design philosophies for 5e was to simplify things, hence they got rid of all those different polearm versions from previous editions (I always liked those tables of stats for Glaive, Guisarme, Halberd etc) in favour of standard stats and then just roleplay it.
What this means is, you can define that Fighter A has a buckler and Fighter B has a tower shield - the stats are the same +2 AC. There are a variety of combat options that have nothing to do with stats and everything to do with the description, as you described - tower shield can be used as static cover. The buckler could be used as an improvised throwing weapon and so on.
Don't forget also that there's the Shield Master feat. You could homebrew that a shield with spikes on could inflict 1d6 damage, instead of the shove. As it's effectively an offhand attack, it doesn't gain STR bonus to damage.
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
Thanks. I do think we'll home brew the house rule of a +3 AC, -5 ft movement Tower Shield.
It's true that we greatly enjoy the Simplified Design of 5e. Especially with so many new players to D&D in general in our group. I was trying to limit the amount of Home Brewed content until we all had a complete handle on the core rules.
I also do enjoy coming up with role-play reasons why certain mechanics work they way they do or how weapons perform. But one of my players is quite enamored with shields. In real history and all games, he loves shields.
I miss the buckler. The idea of less AC but easier to still wield certain weapons without needing to spend an action to unstrap a shield, etc.
Site Rules & Guidelines || How to Tooltip || Contact Support || Changelog || Pricing FAQ || Homebrew FAQ
If you have questions/concerns, please Private Message me or another moderator.
Wary the wizard who focuses on homebrew, for he can create nightmares that you wouldn't even dream of
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
Sorry for the resurrection of this thread, but I want to add some things to the "every shield is the same" discussion.
D&D is awful at giving shields historical appropriate names, what they are made of and they functions (e.g. there is no "tower shield").
Names of large shields: aspis ("hoplite shield" large, concave; stripped to the arm), scutum (roman legionnaire shield of imperial times, rounded rectangular, boss held horizontally), viking/migration era round shields (center boss grip); kite shields (teardrop shaped, stripped to the arm); pavese (mostly rectangular, with a pod to get it up as cover for archers/crossbowmen).
The body of the shield was made out of (laminated) wood and they were often used in formations of units. They are quite unwieldy and giving them a -5 feet to movement + 3/4 cover against ranged attacks from the front sounds like a good homebrew to me.
Names of medium sized shields: again, smaller variants of the viking era shield; heater shield (smaller variant of the kite shield from the high middle ages); typical round, strapped to the arm shields like the Scottish targe, Turkish/Persian/Indian shields and the rotella shields (concave steel shields used, e.g. in the Bolognese style of fighting in the renaissance)
Those could be the "normal" +2 AC shields D&D 5e has in the PHB.
Small shields: like the buckler (held in the fist of you off-hand)
Unlike the large shields, who have to be held close to the body, bucklers work with the "geometry" of the guard position you are in. The 30cm shield cover quite a lot of you body, if it is held out in front of you. In the I.33 manual it is mostly used for protecting the sword hand and controlling the enemy weapon (against counter attacks).
I would keep the +2 AC, but reduce it to +1 vs. ranged attacks in homebrew content. You should also keep in mind that a buckler is very easy to carry around when stowed (hung on the belt or slit over the grip of the sword) unlike the other shields.
I wish there was a small shield that strapped to the forearm (there is definitely a name for it) so we can hold non-weapons (torch, spell focus, spell material, etc) and perform somatic components. It could have 1 AC and all magic shield variants as well.
A lot of this gets into the discussion of what type of story do you want to tell. Do you want to be a simulationist making as mechanically accurate representation of the world as with rules as you can. Do you want to be dramatic and have the rules represent a "feeling" of the world.
I too am generally a fan of 5e's simplified design, lending to the dramatic. I think some mistakes were made but overall good.
3e was much more simulationist. Every single possibility was mechanistically mapped out. This created a lot of choice but a lot of false choices. There tons of options, but 90% of them were mechanically inferior to 10%. When that is true there isn't a choice.
That said if people want more variety the main problem I have with "bucklers" making them flat out inferior. I like DxJxC's idea which allows the hand to be considered "free" for non weapons. That gives them something.
I also agree with DMGorani, D&D is terrible at historic names. I think a lot of comes from the people who wrote the game in the 70s and 80s... had less access to the historic record then we do now, and were not historians but game designers in a pre-Google age.
All that said. When players want "realism" what I think it often pushes to favor lighter armor and weapons.
That's because Barbarians, Monks, Draconic Sorcerers, and Armor of Shadow all have their AC on all the time.
You take the 8 Dex Fighter out of her plate mail and her AC is little better than a Zombie.
Anyone who has actually worn armor knows, it is not pleasant, at all. It's pretty easy to wear a chainshirt and 1-2 shirts (one under to protect your skin and maybe one over) for a long time as long as it's not hot out. If it is hot out and/or you are exerting yourself it get unpleasant. It's true even today: American cops often don't wear their kevlar vests on duty because it's just awful to be in.
For me when I think about simulationism I often think about how the characters act not in combat. It's very videogamy to always be in your armor, unless of course you're expecting probable immediate danger.
To me this means the party's NPCs are often more numerous. As they need mules to carry their stuff and someone to look after the camp when they are adventuring. The same is true of backpacks. The party isn't going to be fighting with the 59lbs of Explorer's Pack on their back. I usually require an Action to take it off and people don't have their shields strapped to their arms while they travel.
It's also probably not appropriate to go walking around town in full armor and carrying weapons.
That said if you're going to be this kind of simulationist then you really shouldn't be using the normal random encounter charts, because it's expect that the fighter sleeps in their plate armor.
I love the idea that a buckler could still hold something in that hand. It's simple, elegant, and meets a demand.
The tower shield ideas I've seen are a bit more awkward. Adding +1 AC over a regular shield might seem small, but it's exponentially more powerful as your numbers get higher. A +3 AC shield in chainmail is a far smaller jump than +3 AC in full plate. You have to be careful that your characters don't become impossible to hit.
Try this: normally, a character hiding behind another character counts as being in half cover. Anyone hiding behind a character equipped with a Tower Shield can claim 3/4s cover instead. Since large shields were only really effective in formations (they're surprisingly quite easy to get around in one on one fights), this is also thematically much more appropriate. Giving your scrawny Rogue 3/4s cover is still a large bonus, but not game breaking, and encourages team play.
In either case, I'd have both those shields available as upgraded versions of the regular shield that players can buy from blacksmiths etc. If the players actively seek out upgraded shields, you have your answers available on request. If they don't go looking for more complex shields, then you save yourself the chaff of additional rules.
I know I'm a far more lenient DM than most of my peers, but I like to run my games in the interest of what's entertaining/fun/engaging, rather than sticking to "this is what the rules say, this is what we're doing."
I allow an item in my homebrew worlds that we call a Wing/Strap shield. It fastens to your non-dominant sleeve at the point right where your bicep meets your elbow, keeping your off-hand completely free. This allows for non-combat items, somatic components, and even two-handed weapons to be used (provided the character's proficient, of course), all while applying a +1 to AC. I usually keep it so only a handful of smiths in my worlds can properly make and sell them, but my players respect me and rarely abuse the leniency ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Making tower shield +5 AC but disadvantage on attack rolls and stealth checks might be a solution.
Permanent +5 AC would be way too strong, and as others have pointed out disadvantage on stealth is no penalty for characters who already have disadvantage from their armour (all heavy armour, most medium armours).
Stormknight has mentioned +3 AC for -5 feet of speed which seems reasonable, but also possibly a little strong. I think for a tower shield it would really need some kind "guard" mechanic as it's not really any better as a shield under normal use (the opposite actually, since they're bulkier and sometimes quite heavy) but they provide way more protection when you can properly position it.
I'd be tempted to make it a permanent +1 AC but before an attack you can see is rolled you can use your reaction to gain an additional +2 AC until the end of your next turn, during which you are reduced to half speed. If combined with half cover or three-quarters cover you use the better AC bonus, not both. Basically the idea is that the tower shield is intended for pure defence in the open, ideal for a tank, whereas a more mobile/aggressive warrior should use a normal shield since it's more flexible?
Probably too detailed for 5e though, as others said, 5e was trying to go simple.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Making things as simple as possible:
Small shields: +1 AC and "free" hand to cast spells. Standard full action for removing the shield (it is attached to the arm by leather straps).
Standard shield: +2 AC, hand used to carry shield (and here a change to something that bothers me) "free action" to drop the shield on the ground since you are holding it and not with it tied up.
Large shields: equal to standard + movement penalty (-5ft) and half-coverage bonus to ranged attacks (including magic attacks) targeting you.
Special: Lizardfolk shield (etc)...standard + offhand attack with no stat bonus (requires proficiency with martial "weapons").
You provide the variations your players want, don't change the armor mechanic up (which can change the game balance) as it's being restricted to something that already exists for specific situations and makes the Feat still make sense.
Obs: On the big shield, some might say that it was still too strong, so you can put the cover bonus as a reaction to a ranged attack that the player can see and that lasts until the start of the player's turn and movement speed drops to 0 while he is "hiding" behind the shield. (but then the Feat starts to make less sense).
If I were to do this, I would do it very differently.
Buckler Shield: As a reaction to being attacked by a natural weapon, melee weapon or ranged weapon attack, you can roll a Dex check (d20+ Dex Modifier). If you beat their attack roll, they miss that roll, but you get no other benefit to AC versus other attacks. Can be donned or doffed as a free action.
Normal Shield: As normal.
Spiked Shield: You can choose to use this a round shield or use it as a Light weapon doing (Two weapon fighting) for 1d4 piercing damage plus your strength modifier. Takes 2 rounds to don or doff this shield as it is strapped on. Costs 50 gp and magical versions can be enchanted as EITHER a weapon (increasing to hit and damage), or a shield (increasing AC). Defender Weapon versions are common.
Tower Shield: As a Bonus Action you can take full cover against any ranged attack till the beginning of your next turn. Does nothing at all against melee attacks. Dons and Doffs as normal (1 round).