Post/Author/DateTime	Post
DwarvenLord77 06-13-07, 01:15 AM	In particular are tower shields worth it for a dwarven fighter that uses a dwarven waraxe? Higher AC in exchange for a minus 2 on attack doesn't seem bad but I like the idea of shield bashing. Whatever I just want to hear your thoughts since I've only played for a month.
Fallenangel359 06-13-07, 01:37 AM	the shield really depends on your current AC. If its high, then making it higher can always be good, or useless if too high I've built a non optimized pixie rogue swashbuckler ecl 10 with ecl 10 wealth, with 38 AC. Level appropriate NPCs couldn't hit me.
DwarvenLord77 06-13-07, 02:00 AM	As of now my dwarf is only level 2 with AC 22 (2 of which is form a heavy shield). I don't know if any of that helps since he is so low.
AAB 06-13-07, 02:12 AM	how'd you get such a massive AC at level 2?
SkyOdin 06-13-07, 02:20 AM	how'd you get such a massive AC at level 2? +1 Fullplate with a heavy shield I assume. Perhaps just regular fullplate if the character has the dodge feat.
RavenDrake 06-13-07, 02:28 AM	22 AC is far from massive. +8 from Full Plate, +2 From Dex, +2 from a large Shield.. that's 22 right there. Here's the thing. It's seldom effecient to take a Tower Shield for the AC boost. Between costing an extra feat for proficiency and the attack penalty(and the fricking KILLER ACP) very few classes can really benefit from the 2 extra points of AC over a large shield... better to take a situational AC boosting feat like Dodge, Mobility, or Two Weapon Defense for extra armour. While the shield bonus can be useful with some of the shield optimising feats from the Complete Series and PHBII(like Shield Ward), you're looking at sinking even more feats into the shield to make it come up even in the long run to a plain old heavy shield. If you're a fighter with feats to burn, or looking for a unique gimick to make your character stand out I might recomend it. That's not to say it's worthless. The ability to use it for cover should never be discounted for more tactical play, and keeping one around(in a wagon, bag of holding, etc) isn't a bad idea. But, from my point of view at least, trying to use it defensively as your primary shield rarely worth it, mechanically.
AAB 06-13-07, 02:35 AM	in defense of my earlier confusion about his high AC - isn't +1 full plate worth about twice as much money as a 2nd level character should have? unless, of course, he's close to 3rd level. but still....
Aryxbez 06-13-07, 05:20 AM	It could also be: +8 fulltplate, +1 dex, +2 shield, +1 from the Shield specialization feat. Also the Tower shield is only worth it if you don't plan to use that shield for anything but to defend you.
JellyPooga 06-13-07, 05:32 AM	Unless you're carrying nothing but your weapons and armour, the Tower shield is horribly heavy, prohibitively so in most cases. For some bizarre reason they've decided to make it almost as heavy as a suit of full-plate...whuh? My advice would be to go with the Heavy shield. Tower Shields are just far more effort than they're worth. At lower levels, the -2 to attack can be crippling, at higher levels, the presence of magic items makes up for any benefit you would get out of a Tower Shield over a Heavy Shield.
Rulebook 06-13-07, 06:21 AM	i like tower shields. at higher levels that 2 extra AC is pretty nice (as is the total cover feature!), and that -2 to hit is not really a problem at all. that being said, i rarely use them, as i prefer mobility type fighters over tanks.
Southernskies 06-13-07, 06:22 AM	Tower shields have their place. You effectively get 2 points of Combat Expertise without having to buy the feat. If you only have a 14 or less Dex and no Int bonus, its a useful tradeoff. The main thing with tower shields is that your character shouldn't be attempting to use Power Attack or similar abilities that trade attack for damage until mid-high level; you need every point of attack bonus you can get to maintain a steady damage output. At low level, where you don't have a good chance of hitting anyway, the extra AC will maintain a road block and funnel foes into the reach of your BDF in ones and twos instead of a horde that can swarm him under in opponents. Tower shields are about battlefield control, more than strait AC boosting.
DrunkDwarf 06-13-07, 06:51 AM	Could you not use the Variable shield enchantment from the Magic Item Compendium... a sizable shield... have it change size from a buckler to a Tower Shield when you need it.
Ertai Planeswalker 06-13-07, 07:23 AM	Animated Tower Shields are t3h :censored:. Besides that, don't forget it can also grant cover. Opponents against whom you have cover cannot make attacks of opportunity against you. And it provides a +2 bonus on reflex saves against effects against which you have cover.
jaelis 06-13-07, 08:09 AM	Normally the 1:1 trade of AC for attack isn't such a good deal. It's OK for you yourself, but if the monster attacks your friends instead, then you've taken a penalty on attacks and gotten no net benefit for the party. Sometimes it is useful, which is why combat expertise is OK, but its not something you would normally want "on" all the time. I think that for a melee fighter, the best thing about a tower shield is that you can use it for cover while you approach an enemy who has reach on you. So I'd probably want one if I knew I would be fighting a lot of big creatures with reach. One strategy is to claim cover and approach the monster, then drop the shield and attack two handed once you're there.
DwarvenLord77 06-13-07, 12:29 PM	To clarify about my AC I have +8 Full plate, +1 Dex, +1 Ring of Protection (I got it in a published quest for 1st level charcters so its not our DMs fault), and +2 Heavy shield. Thanks for all the help about that I still don't know what I'm going to go with but at least now I know its strengths and weaknesses.
mostholy2 06-13-07, 01:01 PM	The whole tower shield as total cover also opens up some very interesting possibilities for anyone who takes a level of fighter including avoiding AoOs, total cover vs. area attacks, etc... If you don't need to spend a feat on it, I think the tower shield well worth the penalties.
madbliza 06-13-07, 01:01 PM	Tower shields, in my opinion, are portable walls. I usually found ways to plant my shield for the concealment bonus so I could fire from behind it and hide from archers. Or, in the case of a dwarven defender I made, stick it in the dirt behind me and use it to boost my AC bonus for attacking with a wall at my back. However, since it clearly states that a tower shield cannot be used for shield bashing, I would switch if that's what you want to do.
Chimaera2000 06-13-07, 03:29 PM	For a mobile, offensive fighter, tower shields aren't worth it because of the crippling armor check penalty and -2 on attack rolls. For a pure "tank" fighter, then the tower shield can have a lot of use for the extra AC and use for full cover. In fact, it isn't a half-bad idea to cart around a tower shield (even an unenhanced one) just for use as full cover. A creative player can find plenty of ways to use this.
vardock 06-13-07, 04:53 PM	they are worth it. 1: fighters do not need a feat to use them. 2: the +2 to Ac is nice, espicaly in low levels or in low magic campaigns. 3: total cover. If you want to be a defender type fighter. tower shield is the way to go. espically if you a Dwarf. Not being encumbered be weight, (If you are a fighter your strenght should be high enought to where this is not a problem) and Having their stability trait. they do well with tower shields. just but a dwarven fighter using a Adamantite tower shield for total cover in a doorway and He might as well be a Solid wall.
Tathas 06-13-07, 08:25 PM	I had a cleric who used the cover feature of a tower shield to blithly walk through melee without provoking any AoO for movement or casting in order to get to someone who needed healing. There are great tactical benefits. 5 foot corridor? Plop this down and have your friends use reach, ranged weapons, or spells to attack over your head. 10 foot corridor? Use the cover to funnel the enemy through a 5 foot gap. I always allowed my players to indicate which direction the cover was facing and attack creatures that wouldn't be affected by that cover. The player lost the AC bonus when making these sideways attacks of course.
Derren S. 06-14-07, 02:34 AM	While the tower shield is not a portable wall and you can't by the rules do what Tathas and madbliza suggest they are still incredibly usefull. Especially archers fear tower shields because it makes them useless and forces them to move to a new position. Also remember that the tower shield was errataed so that it only provides cover in one direction like it did in 3.0.
mostholy2 06-14-07, 10:28 AM	I had a cleric who used the cover feature of a tower shield to blithly walk through melee without provoking any AoO for movement or casting in order to get to someone who needed healing. There are great tactical benefits. 5 foot corridor? Plop this down and have your friends use reach, ranged weapons, or spells to attack over your head. 10 foot corridor? Use the cover to funnel the enemy through a 5 foot gap. I always allowed my players to indicate which direction the cover was facing and attack creatures that wouldn't be affected by that cover. The player lost the AC bonus when making these sideways attacks of course.A few problems with the way you are describing this strategy for your towershield wearing cleric. 1) Any spell with a somatic component will require an extra hand to cast (unless you have the still spell feat). Unless you are going weaponless, you won't be able to cast spells with a free hand. 2) It is a standard action to use the towershield as cover. This would use up your standard action for the round thus preventing you from being able to cast the spell during the same round as you took cover from the towershield (unless you are casting swift/quickened spells). 3) Although you receive total cover from the shield, your allies don't. So they will suffer the same penalties for cover as your opponents are attacking them. You are correct about funnelling opponents through a single area using a tower shield. It can be excellent for battlefield control in a confined space.
Tathas 06-14-07, 10:52 PM	The part about cover from tower shields is:In most situations, it provides the indicated shield bonus to your AC. However, you can instead use it as total cover, though you must give up your attacks to do so. I didn't interpret that as using up your standard action, just as "no attacks for you". Heck, he didn't even have tower shield proficiency, so got an extra -10 on his attack roll for non-proficient shield use the few times he whipped out his mace. Since he wasn't going to hit anyway, that player didn't see any reason to have his weapon equipped, so he had a free hand.
jaelis 06-15-07, 08:02 AM	The FAQ spells out how it is supposed to work, including that you need to take a standard action to claim cover.
mostholy2 06-15-07, 09:30 AM	jaelis is correct. Taking cover from a tower shield is a standard action as specified in the FAQ. To claim total cover from a tower shield, you must use a standard action. The tower rules don't say that, but that's what they mean. Since you can only take one standard action each round, you cannot attack, cast a spell, activate a magic item (except for some use-activated items), use a special ability, use total defense, or start or complete a full-round action during the same round you claim total cover from the shield. You can, however, take a move action before or after you claim cover from the shield.
Jason Snyder 06-15-07, 11:31 AM	Interesting discussion. Ok, it makes sense that if a person is moving and hiding behind a tower shield that you lose your standard action. It does seem logical that the cleric in this example move into position one round using the cover of the shield. Then, on the next round, remove the shield (which is a move action) in such a way as to still provide cover and use his standard action to cast a spell. Of course, one could rule that removing the shield might only take a move action, but setting it up as cover would take more time. my 2cp
mostholy2 06-15-07, 02:47 PM	Well, I have no problems with allowing clerics use towershields as cover while casting spells as a house rule. Hell, if it makes sense to you and improves gameplay...go for it! But if you are playing strictly by what WotC has ruled I don't think there's a way around needing to use a standard action anytime you use the shield for cover. Of course, in extreme emergency healing situations, you could always do quickened healing or a cure spell that only requires a swift action (channeled divine health, close wounds), so that you can move, take total cover (standard), and heal (swift action) during your turn.
Gingerbread Guy 06-15-07, 05:41 PM	A couple quick notes I want to add: 1. As a dwarf you don't have to worry much at all about the tower shield's weight. You're moving 20' so long as you're not totally overloaded, so mobility isn't an issue. 2. If your DM allows it, the blurb in the text for the Exotic Shield Proficiency feat from Races of Stone mentions that DMs might allow a fighter to trade his tower shield proficiecy for Exotic Shield Proficiency. In that case, you might want to chose the Extreme shield, which is basicly an even larger heavy shield. You don't get to take cover behind it or use it for bashing, but its +3 AC and doesn't cost you any penalties to hit. Since you essentially get it for free, and the weight isn't an issue since you're probably a pretty mighty dwarf, I'd say its the most efficient choice for giving you pure, reliable AC. Combining this with full plate and a waraxe means taking full advantage of being a dwarf. ^_^ Whatever you chose, you can't really go wrong. ~Ginger
bigsnarf 06-15-07, 06:49 PM	Go for the extreme shield,-2 to attack stinks at low levels,even for the AC bonus of +4.
NobodyRemembersThis 06-16-07, 01:33 PM	I had a cleric who used the cover feature of a tower shield to blithly walk through melee without provoking any AoO for movement or casting in order to get to someone who needed healing. There are great tactical benefits. 5 foot corridor? Plop this down and have your friends use reach, ranged weapons, or spells to attack over your head. 10 foot corridor? Use the cover to funnel the enemy through a 5 foot gap. I always allowed my players to indicate which direction the cover was facing and attack creatures that wouldn't be affected by that cover. The player lost the AC bonus when making these sideways attacks of course.This is incorrect. Tower shields actually provide total cover in every direction when you opt to use it for cover, as there is no facing. So yes, tower shields are awesome for anyone that just wants to run around the combat field and heal or loot. As far as the standard action or not goes, since you must give up your attacks and it is at least a standard action to attack, one can conclude that it is a standard action to take cover. However, this is not clearly spelled out in the rules.
bigsnarf 06-16-07, 02:10 PM	I never knew that,maybe I should read the PH.:cool:
Derren S. 06-16-07, 03:18 PM	This is incorrect. Tower shields actually provide total cover in every direction when you opt to use it for cover, as there is no facing. That was errataed/changed. They now work like in 3.0 and onöy give cover in one direction.
Abyssal_Eye 06-16-07, 03:53 PM	This discussion got me thinking... would it be possible to negate the -2 on attack by using the "Shieldbearer" spell from the Spell Compendium? With medium to high level casters in the group it should hold long enough to make a nice bonus in combat and it's only a first level spell... Or am I missing something there?
NobodyRemembersThis 06-16-07, 08:26 PM	That was errataed/changed. They now work like in 3.0 and onöy give cover in one direction.Show me. There is nothing in the errata about this. The FAQ is not errata - you've been around long enough to know this. There is nothing indicating there was a change from the 3.5e SRD/PHB in the errata. By the way, in case you can't find it the errata is >HERE< (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20060531a)
DwarvenLord77 06-17-07, 02:40 PM	It looks like I need to get Races of Stone (Thanks Ginger) :D but I will probably eventually get a tower shield for upper levels for the total cover thing that NobodyRemembersThis seems know alot about.
NobodyRemembersThis 06-17-07, 09:11 PM	Well, I conclusively proved that tower shields give total cover from every direction in >THIS THREAD< (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=866541), and that there is no errata contradicting this. :) Tower shields are awesome for creating a nearly unstobable barricade, that much is true. But only in a 5' wide corridor of if tehre are multiple tower shield users in a row. Which explains why people loved them. They grant total cover to the front line, and standard cover to people attacking through that square. Simply beautiful with reach weapons.
Twylyght 06-18-07, 02:47 AM	One of our party members a year or so back crafted an masterwork darkwood tower shield. As part of the constuction process, and at the expenses of paying for double masterwork, he added a "masterwork bracket" on the back the securely held on to his immovable rod. Add an extended Ironwood spell about once every month or so and you have a poratble locked door. So besides the protection as a shield, we got alot of use out of that thing. Bench, table, step ladder, short gap bridger, door, door barring device, shelter, emergency brake for a run away wagon, and a few dozen other I cant remember. Certainly this does not give much credit to a mundane tower shield, but they have use if you fancy them up a bit. As a side note... does a character with 2 immovable rods and the brachiation feat gain a budget, poor manuverabity, version of fly? :rofl: (yes yes I know the RAW answer, but the question is for giggles anyway)
stoicfaux 06-18-07, 01:53 PM	One of our party members a year or so back crafted an masterwork darkwood tower shield. As part of the constuction process, and at the expenses of paying for double masterwork, he added a "masterwork bracket" on the back the securely held on to his immovable rod. Add an extended Ironwood spell about once every month or so and you have a poratble locked door. So besides the protection as a shield, we got alot of use out of that thing. Bench, table, step ladder, short gap bridger, door, door barring device, shelter, emergency brake for a run away wagon, and a few dozen other I cant remember. Hrmmm... if I were an Evil DM, I would let that work in low weight/low stress situations. The rod is a cylinder. The bracket can only grip the rod with so much friction. Under high load/stress I would check to see if this portable door/bridge/stepping stone turned into a see-saw... I would also check for wear and tear on the rod. After all, if the bracket is putting a lot of friction on the rod, it's wearing down the rod, so any time it see-saws, there's a chance it will damage the rod. Now if you had two immovable rods, it wouldn't be a problem.
AAB 06-18-07, 02:22 PM	Hrmmm... if I were an Evil DM, I would let that work in low weight/low stress situations. The rod is a cylinder. The bracket can only grip the rod with so much friction. Under high load/stress I would check to see if this portable door/bridge/stepping stone turned into a see-saw... I would also check for wear and tear on the rod. After all, if the bracket is putting a lot of friction on the rod, it's wearing down the rod, so any time it see-saws, there's a chance it will damage the rod. Now if you had two immovable rods, it wouldn't be a problem. actually, the default immovable rod is a "flat iron bar" (DMG 235). not cylindrical. so by my interpretation it seems like there would be no problem.
Twylyght 06-18-07, 05:52 PM	actually, the default immovable rod is a "flat iron bar" (DMG 235). not cylindrical. so by my interpretation it seems like there would be no problem. Yeah we were going by the text description when we did it. Though there were times the see-saw thing could of been fun. We actually tried it once at got overruled lol. we ended using the shield as a fulcrum and a large branch as the see-saw.
lildeathfrog 06-19-07, 02:04 AM	Ok with me being a level 2 Fighter and 4 Barbarian Neanderthal with a Dex of 14 I love the idea of a tower shield due to the fact that it replaces the -2 to AC when I hit rage :D
mostholy2 06-19-07, 09:14 AM	Ok with me being a level 2 Fighter and 4 Barbarian Neanderthal with a Dex of 14 I love the idea of a tower shield due to the fact that it replaces the -2 to AC when I hit rage :DSeems to me the whole point of Raging is to do as much damage as possible during a short period of time covered by your rage. I would think that you would do better just weilding a 2-hander. If you want added defense you could take improved buckler defense and still gain the benefit of a shield bonus, while still be able to take advantage of the 2-handed damage output.
NobodyRemembersThis 06-19-07, 12:17 PM	I'd rather get a dancing Tower shield myself instead of spending a feat ;)
mostholy2 06-19-07, 01:43 PM	Sure, animated shields are great, but at 6th lvl, I really doubt his DM should be letting him get that much money to spend. I'd rather spend my money on some stat boosting items for extra damage or other AC items.
NobodyRemembersThis 06-19-07, 01:59 PM	Also trueI am just stating I would rather hold out for a dancing shield than spend the feat - regardless of level. :)
lildeathfrog 06-19-07, 02:41 PM	A lot of people here that keeps saying that u waste a feat to use it but if look the Fighter gets it for free and also taking 1 level of fighter gets u a free feat anyways Also on top of it I have a Mithral +1 Tower Shield
vardock 06-20-07, 12:45 PM	Try using a +5 dwarvencraft adamantite tower shield of legacy wielded by a dwarven defender. use it for cover while standing in a doorway. trying to get past you would require either a successful bull rush, which the dwarf could easily get a +12 to resist it due to his racial bonus and the combat focus feats he could easily take. or sunder the shield which would have a ton of Hp for a shield and a hardness of 42. they would have an easier time going thorought the wall.
Derren S. 06-20-07, 01:55 PM	Or they simply kill the defender with touch spells.
AAB 06-20-07, 03:21 PM	not if he has the shield ward feat.:P