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.
"Realistically" readying and stowing a shield are harder than drawing or sheathing a weapon due to where the shield would typically be stowed (bucklers being an exception), but we sacrifice plenty of other realism in favor or narrative focus and game balance, so I think you are right and modifying it for your game is a great idea (whether that's making it as a Bonus Action for everyone, making it a Bonus Action for those with Shield Master, or something else).
I am experimenting with making dropping a shield a (free) interaction which hopefully will promote a bit of versatile weapon use. I also allow an additional weapon mastery choice when using a versatile weapon in two hands. Otherwise most people seem to just carry two weapons.
"Realistically" readying and stowing a shield are harder than drawing or sheathing a weapon due to where the shield would typically be stowed (bucklers being an exception), but we sacrifice plenty of other realism in favor or narrative focus and game balance, so I think you are right and modifying it for your game is a great idea (whether that's making it as a Bonus Action for everyone, making it a Bonus Action for those with Shield Master, or something else).
A Thief can do something like that :D
Level 3: Fast Hands
As a Bonus Action, you can do one of the following. [...]
Use an Object. Take the Utilize action, or take the Magic action to use a magic item that requires that action.
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 disagree. For a character that might occasionally need a free hand, such as an eldritch knight, versatile weapons are fantastic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Why wouldn't those characters use a two handed weapon and just remove a hand to cast. You could maybe argue they couldn't do this as a reaction but during their turn I think most people would allow this.
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.
I wish they had made doffing and donning a shield a Bonus Action, or even part of the attack action, if you got Shield Master.
Or at least I wish they brought back bucklers like in 3rd Ed. They used to give +1 AC if I recall correctly.
"Realistically" readying and stowing a shield are harder than drawing or sheathing a weapon due to where the shield would typically be stowed (bucklers being an exception), but we sacrifice plenty of other realism in favor or narrative focus and game balance, so I think you are right and modifying it for your game is a great idea (whether that's making it as a Bonus Action for everyone, making it a Bonus Action for those with Shield Master, or something else).
I am experimenting with making dropping a shield a (free) interaction which hopefully will promote a bit of versatile weapon use. I also allow an additional weapon mastery choice when using a versatile weapon in two hands. Otherwise most people seem to just carry two weapons.
A Thief can do something like that :D
I disagree. For a character that might occasionally need a free hand, such as an eldritch knight, versatile weapons are fantastic.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Why wouldn't those characters use a two handed weapon and just remove a hand to cast. You could maybe argue they couldn't do this as a reaction but during their turn I think most people would allow this.