I did search, but my Boolean was never good. I have a player that wants to use a versatile weapon and a shield. How does that play out in regards to swapping out SnB to 2H use, and back to SnB?
Donning or doffing a shield requires an action. They could remove the shield on turn 1, attack two-handed on turn 2, re-equip the shield on turn 3, and attack one-handed on turn 4. It’s not feasible. If you put on a shield, it’s on for the fight unless you want to waste your entire action across multiple turns to juggle it on and off.
I have swapped a shield in combat but never more than once per combat. The action cost is too high but sometimes the only way to survive is switching to ranged attacks or needing extra hands.
I did search, but my Boolean was never good. I have a player that wants to use a versatile weapon and a shield. How does that play out in regards to swapping out SnB to 2H use, and back to SnB?
SnB = sword and board.
Strange. The only use I know of for versatile weapons is on monks, and monks don't have much use for shields.
Anyway, SagaTympana is correct. Swapping the shield is a non-starter. Your player would be better off with a rapier, a shield, and backup weapons.
Strange. The only use I know of for versatile weapons is on monks, and monks don't have much use for shields.
They're also useful on characters that intend to Grapple, as you need a free hand for that; grappling is an often overlooked control option but it can actually be really good, especially on a Barbarian (who gets advantage during Rage) so a battleaxe is often better than a greataxe purely for the flexibility as you're only 1 damage down when two-handing, and you can one-hand while grappling.
Really there's so little damage difference that there's no reason to switch when you have a shield; d8 is only 1 less damage on average than a d10; take the Duelling fighting style and you get a +2 to more than compensate, or just ignore it because it's nothing.
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.
I've found with my players that, for the players that wield versatile weapons and a shield... they mostly just decide what they're going to go for before battle starts. I've got a Barbarian player who favors wielding their weapon two-handed for most of the adventuring day, but if they start to get low on health they whip out the shield for that extra defense, just in case.
Strange. The only use I know of for versatile weapons is on monks, and monks don't have much use for shields.
They're also useful on characters that intend to Grapple, as you need a free hand for that; grappling is an often overlook control option but it can actually be really good, especially on a Barbarian (who gets advantage during Rage) so a battleaxe is often better than a greataxe purely for the flexibility as you're only 1 damage down when two-handing, and you can one-hand while grappling.
Really there's so little damage difference that there's no reason to switch when you have a shield; d8 is only 1 less damage on average than a d10; take the Duelling fighting style and you get a +2 to more than compensate, or just ignore it because it's nothing.
Really the reason weapon like a Greataxe is better for pure damage is because it has the Heavy property. This makes it compatible with the Great Weapon Master feat which is great for damage, especially with an easy source of advantage like Reckless Attacks.
Edit: But I absolutely agree that Versatile weapons are great for grapplers and the dueling fighting style is one of the best fighting styles for damage.
I did search, but my Boolean was never good. I have a player that wants to use a versatile weapon and a shield. How does that play out in regards to swapping out SnB to 2H use, and back to SnB?
SnB = sword and board.
Strange. The only use I know of for versatile weapons is on monks, and monks don't have much use for shields.
Anyway, SagaTympana is correct. Swapping the shield is a non-starter. Your player would be better off with a rapier, a shield, and backup weapons.
I think it may in part be from a role play perspective. A halfling wielding a long sword with two hands or a battleaxe with two hands gives the same "image" as a larger race wielding a Greatsword or Greataxe. If these weapons were not versatile, the small races would lack reasonable two handed weapon options.
I also don't think it would really break anything if versatile weapons could be used with GWM when attacking with two hands which would give the small races the option to use GWM which they currently can't do effectively (though that would be a house rule).
Strange. The only use I know of for versatile weapons is on monks, and monks don't have much use for shields.
As a GM, I've been using them lots for the cultists in PotA. I've had to be careful to note which cultists have used crossbows, so that those ones have less AC and more damage when they attack in melee.
Strange. The only use I know of for versatile weapons is on monks, and monks don't have much use for shields.
As a GM, I've been using them lots for the cultists in PotA. I've had to be careful to note which cultists have used crossbows, so that those ones have less AC and more damage when they attack in melee.
The ones wearing shields should be decided beforehand, having those that need to use a Crossbow happen to not be wearing a shield seems like cheating. You can always give the ones with shields a couple of javelins in case they need a ranged attack.
Strange. The only use I know of for versatile weapons is on monks, and monks don't have much use for shields.
As a GM, I've been using them lots for the cultists in PotA. I've had to be careful to note which cultists have used crossbows, so that those ones have less AC and more damage when they attack in melee.
The ones wearing shields should be decided beforehand, having those that need to use a Crossbow happen to not be wearing a shield seems like cheating. You can always give the ones with shields a couple of javelins in case they need a ranged attack.
Yep, all decided and described beforehand. I tell the PCs when the encounter happens, "these ones are standing back, holding crossbows, those ones have weapon and shield and are advancing forward." I have to remember which are which, because its not fair to give the archers the AC bonus from a shield when the PCs get into melee with them.
Thanks for the additional info, I will be passing this along to the player i question, as he IS a barbarian.
A magic item I just awarded a PC was the a warhammer boon from Tempus (War Domain). Its magical property is it can shift as a bonus action from 1h to a 2h Maul. The bonus action to become 2h magically stores the shield in extra-dimensional space. They can use another bonus action to revert back to 1h warhammer, which also brings back the shield, donned. The action economy is great, and the player loves the choice they get each round. Mix in their bonus action spells, and the player always has choices with cost/benefits each round.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Remember there are Rules as Written (RAW), Rules as Intended (RAI), and Rules as Fun (RAF). There's some great RAW, RAI, and RAF here... please check in with your DM to determine how they want to adjudicate the RAW/RAI/RAF for your game.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I did search, but my Boolean was never good. I have a player that wants to use a versatile weapon and a shield. How does that play out in regards to swapping out SnB to 2H use, and back to SnB?
SnB = sword and board.
Donning or doffing a shield requires an action. They could remove the shield on turn 1, attack two-handed on turn 2, re-equip the shield on turn 3, and attack one-handed on turn 4. It’s not feasible. If you put on a shield, it’s on for the fight unless you want to waste your entire action across multiple turns to juggle it on and off.
Thanks.
However you are quite able to use a shield and use a versatile weapon with one hand.(doing the 1 handed damage)
I have swapped a shield in combat but never more than once per combat. The action cost is too high but sometimes the only way to survive is switching to ranged attacks or needing extra hands.
Strange. The only use I know of for versatile weapons is on monks, and monks don't have much use for shields.
Anyway, SagaTympana is correct. Swapping the shield is a non-starter. Your player would be better off with a rapier, a shield, and backup weapons.
Longswords can be used as versatile, as can several other weapons.
They're also useful on characters that intend to Grapple, as you need a free hand for that; grappling is an often overlooked control option but it can actually be really good, especially on a Barbarian (who gets advantage during Rage) so a battleaxe is often better than a greataxe purely for the flexibility as you're only 1 damage down when two-handing, and you can one-hand while grappling.
Really there's so little damage difference that there's no reason to switch when you have a shield; d8 is only 1 less damage on average than a d10; take the Duelling fighting style and you get a +2 to more than compensate, or just ignore it because it's nothing.
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.
Thanks for the additional info, I will be passing this along to the player i question, as he IS a barbarian.
I've found with my players that, for the players that wield versatile weapons and a shield... they mostly just decide what they're going to go for before battle starts. I've got a Barbarian player who favors wielding their weapon two-handed for most of the adventuring day, but if they start to get low on health they whip out the shield for that extra defense, just in case.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
Really the reason weapon like a Greataxe is better for pure damage is because it has the Heavy property. This makes it compatible with the Great Weapon Master feat which is great for damage, especially with an easy source of advantage like Reckless Attacks.
Edit: But I absolutely agree that Versatile weapons are great for grapplers and the dueling fighting style is one of the best fighting styles for damage.
I think it may in part be from a role play perspective. A halfling wielding a long sword with two hands or a battleaxe with two hands gives the same "image" as a larger race wielding a Greatsword or Greataxe. If these weapons were not versatile, the small races would lack reasonable two handed weapon options.
I also don't think it would really break anything if versatile weapons could be used with GWM when attacking with two hands which would give the small races the option to use GWM which they currently can't do effectively (though that would be a house rule).
As a GM, I've been using them lots for the cultists in PotA. I've had to be careful to note which cultists have used crossbows, so that those ones have less AC and more damage when they attack in melee.
The ones wearing shields should be decided beforehand, having those that need to use a Crossbow happen to not be wearing a shield seems like cheating. You can always give the ones with shields a couple of javelins in case they need a ranged attack.
Yep, all decided and described beforehand. I tell the PCs when the encounter happens, "these ones are standing back, holding crossbows, those ones have weapon and shield and are advancing forward." I have to remember which are which, because its not fair to give the archers the AC bonus from a shield when the PCs get into melee with them.
A magic item I just awarded a PC was the a warhammer boon from Tempus (War Domain). Its magical property is it can shift as a bonus action from 1h to a 2h Maul. The bonus action to become 2h magically stores the shield in extra-dimensional space. They can use another bonus action to revert back to 1h warhammer, which also brings back the shield, donned. The action economy is great, and the player loves the choice they get each round. Mix in their bonus action spells, and the player always has choices with cost/benefits each round.
Remember there are Rules as Written (RAW), Rules as Intended (RAI), and Rules as Fun (RAF). There's some great RAW, RAI, and RAF here... please check in with your DM to determine how they want to adjudicate the RAW/RAI/RAF for your game.