Can you attack with a longsword using 2 hands for a 1d10 damage while simultaneously wearing a shield but not actively using it for defense, meaning not gaining the +2 to AC for the whole round of combat? Or do you need to spend 1 action to doff your shield before you can switch to d10 damage?
Can you attack with a longsword using 2 hands for a 1d10 damage while simultaneously wearing a shield but not using it, meaning not gaining the +2 to AC? Or you need to doff your shield before you can switch to d10?
Yea you need to doff the shield, can't hold both at the same time.
Can you attack with a longsword using 2 hands for a 1d10 damage while simultaneously wearing a shield but not using it, meaning not gaining the +2 to AC? Or you need to doff your shield before you can switch to d10?
Changing a shield from wielded (used) to worn (not used) is an example of doffing, and takes an action.
Ordinarily no, you have to doff the shield to use a weapon with 2-hands. There are two very rare exceptions:
1. is if you somehow have more than 2 arms (as a result of a spell like true polymorph).
2. your shield is an animated shield. An animated shield as a bonus action can be made to levitate in front of you for a minute, if you do not have a free hand after a minute then it'll drop to the ground (no doff action needed).
Given true polymorph is a 9th level spell and animated shield is a very rare magic item, not things you'll see in 99% of campaigns. But those would technically work.
Can you attack with a longsword using 2 hands for a 1d10 damage while simultaneously wearing a shield but not using it, meaning not gaining the +2 to AC? Or you need to doff your shield before you can switch to d10?
Changing a shield from wielded (used) to worn (not used) is an example of doffing, and takes an action.
Got it! 😀
Just a clarification. Is a worn shield still strapped to your arm (but not giving you the +2 AC) or it is on your back?
Can you attack with a longsword using 2 hands for a 1d10 damage while simultaneously wearing a shield but not using it, meaning not gaining the +2 to AC? Or you need to doff your shield before you can switch to d10?
Changing a shield from wielded (used) to worn (not used) is an example of doffing, and takes an action.
Got it! 😀 Just a clarification. Is a worn shield still strapped to your arm (but not giving you the +2 AC) or it is on your back?
In terms of game mechanics there is no difference, since the thing that matters is you're not wielding it.
It's however you think it is "worn," but I would expect strapped to your back, I guess --- "strapped to your arm" probably means you are still wielding it (which is why it takes a full action to doff or don). The game doesn't really have special rules for bucklers.
It could be accomplished by playing a Thri-Kreen, but that's a rather specialized option.
This does not work. The extra arms that a Thri-Kreen get can only carry tiny objects or weapons with the Light property. They can't be used to attack two-handed or wield a shield.
Secondary Arms
You have two slightly smaller secondary arms below your primary pair of arms. The secondary arms can manipulate an object, open or close a door or container, pick up or set down a Tiny object, or wield a weapon that has the light property.
While everyone is correct by RAW, I'd just ask your DM. Right now versatile weapons are kind of pointless due to this. Personally I'd rule at the start of your turn you decide if you are going offense with it being wielded two handed or defense using the shield.
While everyone is correct by RAW, I'd just ask your DM. Right now versatile weapons are kind of pointless due to this. Personally I'd rule at the start of your turn you decide if you are going offense with it being wielded two handed or defense using the shield.
I would disagree. There is a definite point to them. You can choose whether you want better armor or more damage without being required to carry an extra weapon. You also potentially save an action transitioning since you only have to doff or don the shield. If you have a one handed weapon and a two handed weapon you have to unequip the one weapon and draw the other. Potentially you can do some of that with the free actions involved in making an attack during an Attack action, but that isn't guaranteed.
The advantage of Versatile is somewhat minor when compared to the advantage offered by some other weapon properties, but I certainly wouldn't call it 'pointless'.
Sorry, just disagree. Its not worth an action to swap off a shield, going from 1d8 to 1d10 isn't worth your action. The advantage offered is less than the costs to use it.
The value of swapping in the middle of combat is a separate issue. Versatility can be used without sacrificing an Action (by swapping before combat begins based on needs and expectations).
Of course it isn't that hard to just carry two separate weapons and switch your weapon out of combat, and doing so will usually result in an even more significant change between the weapons, so Versatility is certainly of limited use. It is just that, as I said, I don't think it is completely pointless.
While everyone is correct by RAW, I'd just ask your DM. Right now versatile weapons are kind of pointless due to this. Personally I'd rule at the start of your turn you decide if you are going offense with it being wielded two handed or defense using the shield.
No, the fact that versatile weapons and shields doesn't work well together doesn't make versatile weapons pointless. They can work well when you switching between one weapon and dual-wielding or when you use a focus for your spellcasting. Of course both those are easier done with the new rules for equipping weapons during your turn but that still has nothing to do with shields.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Can you attack with a longsword using 2 hands for a 1d10 damage while simultaneously wearing a shield but not actively using it for defense, meaning not gaining the +2 to AC for the whole round of combat? Or do you need to spend 1 action to doff your shield before you can switch to d10 damage?
Yea you need to doff the shield, can't hold both at the same time.
Changing a shield from wielded (used) to worn (not used) is an example of doffing, and takes an action.
Ordinarily no, you have to doff the shield to use a weapon with 2-hands. There are two very rare exceptions:
1. is if you somehow have more than 2 arms (as a result of a spell like true polymorph).
2. your shield is an animated shield. An animated shield as a bonus action can be made to levitate in front of you for a minute, if you do not have a free hand after a minute then it'll drop to the ground (no doff action needed).
Given true polymorph is a 9th level spell and animated shield is a very rare magic item, not things you'll see in 99% of campaigns. But those would technically work.
It could be accomplished by playing a Thri-Kreen, but that's a rather specialized option.
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.
.
Got it! 😀
Just a clarification. Is a worn shield still strapped to your arm (but not giving you the +2 AC) or it is on your back?
In terms of game mechanics there is no difference, since the thing that matters is you're not wielding it.
It's however you think it is "worn," but I would expect strapped to your back, I guess --- "strapped to your arm" probably means you are still wielding it (which is why it takes a full action to doff or don). The game doesn't really have special rules for bucklers.
This does not work. The extra arms that a Thri-Kreen get can only carry tiny objects or weapons with the Light property. They can't be used to attack two-handed or wield a shield.
While everyone is correct by RAW, I'd just ask your DM. Right now versatile weapons are kind of pointless due to this. Personally I'd rule at the start of your turn you decide if you are going offense with it being wielded two handed or defense using the shield.
I would disagree. There is a definite point to them. You can choose whether you want better armor or more damage without being required to carry an extra weapon. You also potentially save an action transitioning since you only have to doff or don the shield. If you have a one handed weapon and a two handed weapon you have to unequip the one weapon and draw the other. Potentially you can do some of that with the free actions involved in making an attack during an Attack action, but that isn't guaranteed.
The advantage of Versatile is somewhat minor when compared to the advantage offered by some other weapon properties, but I certainly wouldn't call it 'pointless'.
Sorry, just disagree. Its not worth an action to swap off a shield, going from 1d8 to 1d10 isn't worth your action. The advantage offered is less than the costs to use it.
The value of swapping in the middle of combat is a separate issue. Versatility can be used without sacrificing an Action (by swapping before combat begins based on needs and expectations).
Of course it isn't that hard to just carry two separate weapons and switch your weapon out of combat, and doing so will usually result in an even more significant change between the weapons, so Versatility is certainly of limited use. It is just that, as I said, I don't think it is completely pointless.
No, the fact that versatile weapons and shields doesn't work well together doesn't make versatile weapons pointless. They can work well when you switching between one weapon and dual-wielding or when you use a focus for your spellcasting. Of course both those are easier done with the new rules for equipping weapons during your turn but that still has nothing to do with shields.