Post/Author/DateTime	Post
jerrycutshaw 08-29-07, 08:09 AM	Is it feasible to bull rush with a tower shield? I'm thinking on playing a Roman centurion type character. I thought I could take the Shock Trooper feat along with it. Round 1: Charge using the Tower shield for protection throwing a javelin. Round 2: Draw the shortshord. Plow into them with the Tower Shield using the Shock Trooper tactical option to push them into another opponents square and trip them. Is this tactic even legal?
KRATOS_BLADE_of_SPARTA 08-29-07, 08:32 AM	I have no idea if it is legal but it sounds cool, unfortunately I'm AFBooks for a month so I can't look it up for you. When I read the Thread Title I thought you meant use the Tower as Full Cover and Bullrush with it.
Lawkeeper 08-29-07, 08:52 AM	Yes, you can bull rush with a tower shield. You just can't "shield bash", but it's not the same thing as a bull rush. So yes, you can use a tower shield with the Shock Trooper feat.
jerrycutshaw 08-29-07, 09:12 AM	I have no idea if it is legal but it sounds cool, unfortunately I'm AFBooks for a month so I can't look it up for you. When I read the Thread Title I thought you meant use the Tower as Full Cover and Bullrush with it. Well actually that WAS my question even though I didn't say it. I mean in the scenario I'm speaking of is it possible to use the Tower shield for either AC or Cover? Or is the AC option the only one I can use?
Lawkeeper 08-29-07, 09:15 AM	Well actually that WAS my question even though I didn't say it. I mean in the scenario I'm speaking of is it possible to use the Tower shield for either AC or Cover? Or is the AC option the only one I can use? To use it as cover, you must give up the attack. By the FAQ, this means using a standard action. Bull rush is either a standard action or part of a charge (a full action). Therefore, you can't both claim cover and bull rush in the same round.
tarkin 08-29-07, 11:37 AM	1. You can definitely have a Tower Shield while you are Bull Rushing. 2. No, you do not get the benefit you desire. Merely having a Tower Shield does not grant you what you want. When you have a Tower shield you must make a choice: A. Use it as a shield, getting a small bonus (+4 to AC) B. Use it to get Total Cover. Doing so REQUIRES that you give up all attacks: However, you can instead use it as total cover, though you must give up your attacks to do so. Bull Rush is an attack. You can't do it while using it for cover. ------------- I could see building a feat to give you SOME extra benefits when using a tower shiled while Bull Rushing, but not total cover. To get Total Cover while Bull Rushing, I would probably require nothing less than an Epic Prestige Class ability.
Watchman 08-29-07, 03:06 PM	Random side note: Roman shields hardly count as Tower Shields in D&D terms. They're like meter times half a meter in size; that's Heavy Shield for you and no mistake. More to the point, Roman infantry doctrine was too heavy on aggressive maneuvering to have any place for the kind of huge and cumbersome "body shield" the D&D Tower Shield simulates.
Spikes01k 08-29-07, 03:17 PM	Random side note: Roman shields hardly count as Tower Shields in D&D terms. They're like meter times half a meter in size; that's Heavy Shield for you and no mistake. More to the point, Roman infantry doctrine was too heavy on aggressive maneuvering to have any place for the kind of huge and cumbersome "body shield" the D&D Tower Shield simulates. yes they had special training to use their "heavy" shields to gain full cover in a group, among other things.
G_Mancer 08-29-07, 06:02 PM	yes they had special training to use their "heavy" shields to gain full cover in a group, among other things. like the feat Phalanx Fighting. and also the other feat which gives your neighbor a +1 bonus to AC. if thats what Phalanx Fighting does then by the original "Phalanx Fighting" i had mean the feat where when you have a heavy shield and a light weapon you get a bonus to attack.
Watchman 08-30-07, 04:39 AM	yes they had special training to use their "heavy" shields to gain full cover in a group, among other things.Well yeah, the testudo. Needs a lot of men to create a sufficient density of shields, and AFAIK outside show-off exercises only ever used in siege assaults. ...so ?
Lawkeeper 08-30-07, 08:52 AM	Phalanx Fighting is exactly what the Roman legionaries did (and many other following them), since it requires a heavy shield and light weapon. Scutum and gladius are exactly that. And its effect is particularly good, since it can give a full +3 AC bonus and +1 Reflex bonus (all unnamed IIRC), which also depicts the primary usefulness of a shield wall. The name of the feat is very bad: it refers to the greek phalanxes, which used to fight with a heavy shield and a spear/longspear. For "historical precision", I'd rather give this feat a name like Shield Wall or Legion's Frontline or something in the like. Instead, a "historically correct" Phalanx Fighting feat should give the possibility of wearing a longspear with only one hand when using a heavy shield (and maybe fighting as part of a formation). Perhaps with a small attack penalty, like -2 (I refer to Monkey Grip for that penalty). Or anything else dealing with the combination heavy shield + longspear.
Johnny_Angel 08-30-07, 11:52 AM	Well actually that WAS my question even though I didn't say it. I mean in the scenario I'm speaking of is it possible to use the Tower shield for either AC or Cover? Or is the AC option the only one I can use? To use it as cover, you must give up the attack. By the FAQ, this means using a standard action. Bull rush is either a standard action or part of a charge (a full action). Therefore, you can't both claim cover and bull rush in the same round. If you can find a way to get an extra standard action, it would work.
jerrycutshaw 08-30-07, 12:11 PM	Random side note: Roman shields hardly count as Tower Shields in D&D terms. They're like meter times half a meter in size; that's Heavy Shield for you and no mistake. More to the point, Roman infantry doctrine was too heavy on aggressive maneuvering to have any place for the kind of huge and cumbersome "body shield" the D&D Tower Shield simulates. Are you certain of this? I can't find definitions for this anwhere but my thought was a light shield is on the order of 2 feet accross, heavy shield is like the traditional Hoplite shield on the order of 3+ feet accross. The players handbook says a tower shield is "nearly as tall as you are". I am very familiar with Roman warfare tactics and a Roman Infantryman braced for combat behind his shield only exposed the eyes up and ankle down. While marching the shield stretched from chin to knee. If this isn't a tower shield what is it? I just assumed since a Roman Shield is larger than a Heavy shield it must be a Tower shield.
jerrycutshaw 08-30-07, 12:23 PM	like the feat Phalanx Fighting. and also the other feat which gives your neighbor a +1 bonus to AC. if thats what Phalanx Fighting does then by the original "Phalanx Fighting" i had mean the feat where when you have a heavy shield and a light weapon you get a bonus to attack. Where can I locate the Phalanx Fighting feat?
tarkin 08-30-07, 12:42 PM	If you can find a way to get an extra standard action, it would work. No. Lawkeeper was wrong about the specifics, though right about the generalities. The Tower Shield does NOT 'just' use a standard action. Instead the Tower Shield says: However, you can instead use it as total cover, though you must give up your attacks to do so. It does not matter how many standard actions you have, you can NEVER do ANY attacks while using a Tower Shield. So even if you are a Choker (or Shape shifted into a Choker), and have two standard actions, you can never use a Tower Shield to gain Cover and also do any attack, not even a Bull Rush.
Watchman 08-30-07, 03:16 PM	Are you certain of this? I can't find definitions for this anwhere but my thought was a light shield is on the order of 2 feet accross, heavy shield is like the traditional Hoplite shield on the order of 3+ feet accross. The players handbook says a tower shield is "nearly as tall as you are". I am very familiar with Roman warfare tactics and a Roman Infantryman braced for combat behind his shield only exposed the eyes up and ankle down. While marching the shield stretched from chin to knee. If this isn't a tower shield what is it? I just assumed since a Roman Shield is larger than a Heavy shield it must be a Tower shield.As certain as one now can be referring to numbers out of actual archeological data - although to be exact most scutum were actually about 1.2x0.6m or bit less in dimension. And that was actually already cumbersome enough (not in the least thanks to its considerable weight stemming from the triple-layer plywood structure) that light infantry had to use different types, and the whole design was apparently eventually cut down a bit after some extensive campaigning in Germanic wilderness around mid-Imperial period. Please do recall that the Romans, like about everyone else, crouched behind their shields to present as little a target to the enemy as possible. Also, IIRC judging by surviving skeletons Imperial Roman soldiery were on the average something like 170cm tall (depending a bit of region of recruitement - for dietary reasons Mediterraneans were on the average somewhat shorter than "northerners"); substract the 120cm height of the shield from that, and you're already pretty darn close to "from chin to knee". Plus Roman hand-to-hand tactics made a fair bit of offensive use of the shield - something you can't do with Tower Shields in D&D. I wouldn't be very surprised if they picked that up from the Celts, who made considerable use of tall shields of comparable dimensions albeit generally lighter construction. Historical examples of D&D Tower Shields would be what are usually termed pavises - huge "body shields" usually quite literally as tall as their users if not more, which contemporary accounts often describe the warriors "leaning on" (ie. resting on the ground and bracing against). Typically used by static defensive infantry (nigh invariably having a long spear as their primary weapon, although some - like the Achaemenid Persian sparabara - for one reason or another used mid-lenght ones) whose main job was to form up into a solid and hopefully immovable shieldwall, typically in front of missile troops (crossbowmen in China and Medieval Italy, archers pretty much everywhere else) who handled the offense.
Johnny_Angel 08-30-07, 05:29 PM	No. Lawkeeper was wrong about the specifics, though right about the generalities. The Tower Shield does NOT 'just' use a standard action. Instead the Tower Shield says: It does not matter how many standard actions you have, you can NEVER do ANY attacks while using a Tower Shield. So even if you are a Choker (or Shape shifted into a Choker), and have two standard actions, you can never use a Tower Shield to gain Cover and also do any attack, not even a Bull Rush. Bull Rush first; use the extra standard action to take total cover after you've already bull-rushed.
ToastedAmphibian 08-30-07, 07:03 PM	Bull Rush first; use the extra standard action to take total cover after you've already bull-rushed. You must GIVE UP YOUR ATTACKS. Thats like saying, you have to pay a dollar to take a toll road. So, you have a dollar. You cant go buy a drink from a vending machine with that dollar, and then "Give up that dollar" to teh toll collector, as you already used it. With two standard actions, replace teh toll both with a bandit who says, "Give me all your money" I dontr think youd get away with saying ok, then buying a drink and giving him yoru change (Probably just get you shanked for being a smart ass? Atleast thats what usualy happens to me)
Johnny_Angel 08-30-07, 07:09 PM	You must GIVE UP YOUR ATTACKS. Thats like saying, you have to pay a dollar to take a toll road. So, you have a dollar. You cant go buy a drink from a vending machine with that dollar, and then "Give up that dollar" to teh toll collector, as you already used it. With two standard actions, replace teh toll both with a bandit who says, "Give me all your money" I dontr think youd get away with saying ok, then buying a drink and giving him yoru change (Probably just get you shanked for being a smart ass? Atleast thats what usualy happens to me) Nice example, but it's not entirely accurate. A better example would be if I had 2 dollars. While having 2 dollars, if I run into the bandit, he will demand all of my money and take 2 dollars from me. If I again have two dollars, I could buy the drink for 1 dollar before the bandit demands that I give up all of my money; then the bandit only gets 1 dollar because 1 dollar is all the money that I have.
ToastedAmphibian 08-30-07, 07:28 PM	Nice example, but it's not entirely accurate. A better example would be if I had 2 dollars. While having 2 dollars, if I run into the bandit, he will demand all of my money and take 2 dollars from me. If I again have two dollars, I could buy the drink for 1 dollar before the bandit demands that I give up all of my money; then the bandit only gets 1 dollar because 1 dollar is all the money that I have. At which point you get shanked
Johnny_Angel 08-30-07, 07:31 PM	At which point you get shanked Well, that depends. If I have the soda, I can use it for total cover which would negate the shank attempt.
akinckillerchris 08-30-07, 07:34 PM	IM CONFUSED! about the whole doller thing "commits ritual sabuku*
akinckillerchris 08-30-07, 07:45 PM	Is it feasible to bull rush with a tower shield? I'm thinking on playing a Roman centurion type character. I thought I could take the Shock Trooper feat along with it. Round 1: Charge using the Tower shield for protection throwing a javelin. Round 2: Draw the shortshord. Plow into them with the Tower Shield using the Shock Trooper tactical option to push them into another opponents square and trip them. Is this tactic even legal? im thinking maybe you could (if you really wanted to be like some sort of spartan like person and get the cover bonus and what not) make a heavy round sheild and put a continuous effect of some sort like blur or some sort will give you 20% miss chance for "concealment" it would be 2X3X1,800gpso it would cost just out right buying...10800gp if makeing same gp and 432 xp need craft magic arms and armor (and blur spell) EC of 3 same gold because it has a duration in minutes per level and disc of it says if it does times cost by 2 and you devide base by 2 so it evens out to same
Johnny_Angel 08-30-07, 07:49 PM	IM CONFUSED! about the whole doller thing "commits ritual sabuku* It was supposed to be an example which could be compared to the bull rush/standard action debate. For just a moment, pretend that we're playing a gamed called Bandits & Beverages. It's a lot like D&D, but slightly different. In Bandits & Beverages there is a rule which states that you must give up all of your dollars in exchange for the ability to get robbed (and/or shanked.) My character has 2 dollars in a session of B&B. While having 2 dollars, I get robbed by a bandit. By the rules, I must give up all of my dollars; this means that I give the bandits 2 dollars -which is "all of my dollars." Later on in the B&B adventure, I know that I have to pass through the bandit territory a second time. Once again, I have 2 dollars. I decide that I want to get some benefit from my 2 dollars before they are taken from me. Along the way, I find a beverage machine; I spend 1 dollar to have access to a beverage. I now have 1 dollar and 1 beverage. Once again, I encounter the bandit, but I encounter the bandit after already spending 1 dollar. By the rules of B&B, I must give the bandit all of my dollars. At this time I only have 1 dollar, so the bandit would only get 1 dollar from my character because I only have 1 dollar. Now, how does that relate to the tower shield and D&D? To take full cover using a tower shield, you must give up all of your attacks. To Bull Rush in D&D takes a full round action (it's part of a charge.) Let's say that somehow I have an extra standard action. (via haste, being a choker, etc.) If I use the tower shield to take full cover as the first part of my turn, I am required to give up all of my attacks. That means that even though I have 2 standard actions, I cannot attack with either of them. If I perform the Bull Rush first (full round action,) I can attack because I have not given up my attacks yet. That means I can Bull Rush (as a full round action) which is an attack, and I now still have a standard action left in my turn. So, what I do is decide to use the tower shield for cover after already performing the bull rush. The rules state that I must give up all of my attacks to do so. I have 1 standard action left, so I give up all of my attacks. At this point I only have 1 attack to give up, so I only give up that 1 attack...but I still fullfill the requirements of being able to take cover using the shield.
akinckillerchris 08-30-07, 07:54 PM	wow that is.....cool i would have never thought of saying that .......never would have thought of that either..never even heard of B&B either so ya...thats cool tho thanks for clearing that up for me i can remove my katana now
ToastedAmphibian 08-30-07, 08:59 PM	Only problem is that hes buyign the soda AND getting mugged all within the same six secounds..... The vending machine isnt that fast, so if you try to stick teh dollar in, you get shanked :} B&B is alot of fun though
ToastedAmphibian 08-30-07, 09:02 PM	Congrats, you get my first sig qoute!
Johnny_Angel 08-30-07, 09:12 PM	Congrats, you get my first sig qoute! I feel honored. I'm going to celebrate by buying a second soda.
akinckillerchris 08-31-07, 09:17 AM	I feel honored. I'm going to celebrate by buying a second soda. dont forget to buy us one
jerrycutshaw 08-31-07, 01:33 PM	As certain as one now can be referring to numbers out of actual archeological data - although to be exact most scutum were actually about 1.2x0.6m or bit less in dimension. And that was actually already cumbersome enough (not in the least thanks to its considerable weight stemming from the triple-layer plywood structure) that light infantry had to use different types, and the whole design was apparently eventually cut down a bit after some extensive campaigning in Germanic wilderness around mid-Imperial period. Please do recall that the Romans, like about everyone else, crouched behind their shields to present as little a target to the enemy as possible. Also, IIRC judging by surviving skeletons Imperial Roman soldiery were on the average something like 170cm tall (depending a bit of region of recruitement - for dietary reasons Mediterraneans were on the average somewhat shorter than "northerners"); substract the 120cm height of the shield from that, and you're already pretty darn close to "from chin to knee". Plus Roman hand-to-hand tactics made a fair bit of offensive use of the shield - something you can't do with Tower Shields in D&D. I wouldn't be very surprised if they picked that up from the Celts, who made considerable use of tall shields of comparable dimensions albeit generally lighter construction. Historical examples of D&D Tower Shields would be what are usually termed pavises - huge "body shields" usually quite literally as tall as their users if not more, which contemporary accounts often describe the warriors "leaning on" (ie. resting on the ground and bracing against). Typically used by static defensive infantry (nigh invariably having a long spear as their primary weapon, although some - like the Achaemenid Persian sparabara - for one reason or another used mid-lenght ones) whose main job was to form up into a solid and hopefully immovable shieldwall, typically in front of missile troops (crossbowmen in China and Medieval Italy, archers pretty much everywhere else) who handled the offense. I love the historical analysis Watchman but I'm unclear. Are you arguing for or against a Roman shield being a Tower Shield. As far as you other guys and the Bandits and Beverages stuff that had me rolling. It couldn't be further from what I was wondering but VERY entertaining none the less :)
tarkin 08-31-07, 01:48 PM	I read giving up all your attacks as something that can NOT be done in the same round that you have already attacked. Otherwise I see it like this: BAB is 6 I do a Full round action. 1. I take my first attack. 2. I then do the Tower Shield action, giving up all future attacks. This kind of thing (and the thing where you get yourself a 2nd standard action) are not valid. They are just lame attempts to get around the rule. The rule is simple: you have to give up all your attacks that round. No rules-lawyering to get around this should be allowed.
Johnny_Angel 08-31-07, 01:54 PM	I read giving up all your attacks as something that can NOT be done in the same round that you have already attacked. Otherwise I see it like this: BAB is 6 I do a Full round action. 1. I take my first attack. 2. I then do the Tower Shield action, giving up all future attacks. This kind of thing (and the thing where you get yourself a 2nd standard action) are not valid. They are just lame attempts to get around the rule. The rule is simple: you have to give up all your attacks that round. No rules-lawyering to get around this should be allowed. I can see your point of view, but I still don't agree with it because that's not what the ability/option says. I'll sit down tonight and read it for myself because right now I'm going off of what other people are saying. At the moment though, I am being told that using the tower shield in that manner requires you to give up all of your attacks; if you have only 1 available attack then 1 attack would be all of your attacks. That's exactly why things which grant you haste are so valuable -because having an extra action allows you to do things which you normally wouldn't be able to do due to the limit on actions in a round.
Jaxgaret 08-31-07, 02:27 PM	I can see your point of view, but I still don't agree with it because that's not what the ability/option says. I'll sit down tonight and read it for myself because right now I'm going off of what other people are saying. At the moment though, I am being told that using the tower shield in that manner requires you to give up all of your attacks; if you have only 1 available attack then 1 attack would be all of your attacks. That's exactly why things which grant you haste are so valuable -because having an extra action allows you to do things which you normally wouldn't be able to do due to the limit on actions in a round. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/armor.htm#shieldTower It looks as if you have to give up all of your attacks, period. It doesn't say anything about standard actions or any type of action - it just says "you must give up your attacks", which seems to preclude attacking at all on your turn.
Johnny_Angel 08-31-07, 04:10 PM	http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/armor.htm#shieldTower It looks as if you have to give up all of your attacks, period. It doesn't say anything about standard actions or any type of action - it just says "you must give up your attacks", which seems to preclude attacking at all on your turn. ..and to quote the SRD: "Shield, Tower This massive wooden shield is nearly as tall as you are. 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. The shield does not, however, provide cover against targeted spells; a spellcaster can cast a spell on you by targeting the shield you are holding. You cannot bash with a tower shield, nor can you use your shield hand for anything else." You are correct. I agree that you must "give up all of your attacks." If somehow I end up with extra actions, what in the tower shield ruling states that I must decide to take cover via the shield at the beginning of my turn? Again, let's say I somehow have 2 standard actions. If at the beginning of my turn I decide to take cover using the shield.. I must "give up all" of my attacks. At this point in time, that means I cannot use either of my 2 standard actions to attack. Two opportunities to attack is all I have, so I give up all of them -which is 2. In the next round I decide to change my tactics. In this round I use one of my standard actions to attack -which uses one of my standard actions. Since I still have a full turn left, I then say that I am taking cover from the shield. Once again, by RAW I must give up all of my attacks. At this point in time I have 1 standard action which can be used to attack. I have 1; 1 is all that I have. I give up all of my attacks -which in this round turns out to be 1. 2-2 = 0 I gave up all of my attacks. 1-1 = 0 I gave up all of my attacks.
akinckillerchris 08-31-07, 06:34 PM	..and to quote the SRD: "Shield, Tower This massive wooden shield is nearly as tall as you are. 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. The shield does not, however, provide cover against targeted spells; a spellcaster can cast a spell on you by targeting the shield you are holding. You cannot bash with a tower shield, nor can you use your shield hand for anything else." You are correct. I agree that you must "give up all of your attacks." If somehow I end up with extra actions, what in the tower shield ruling states that I must decide to take cover via the shield at the beginning of my turn? Again, let's say I somehow have 2 standard actions. If at the beginning of my turn I decide to take cover using the shield.. I must "give up all" of my attacks. At this point in time, that means I cannot use either of my 2 standard actions to attack. Two opportunities to attack is all I have, so I give up all of them -which is 2. In the next round I decide to change my tactics. In this round I use one of my standard actions to attack -which uses one of my standard actions. Since I still have a full turn left, I then say that I am taking cover from the shield. Once again, by RAW I must give up all of my attacks. At this point in time I have 1 standard action which can be used to attack. I have 1; 1 is all that I have. I give up all of my attacks -which in this round turns out to be 1. 2-2 = 0 I gave up all of my attacks. 1-1 = 0 I gave up all of my attacks. that is the lagistics of it really if you got 2 actions use one to attack and one to shield thats what it states in the rules and thats the base nitty gritty of tha ****** ladies and jentlemen if not the well shat ima stick with his awnser
Watchman 09-01-07, 03:22 AM	I love the historical analysis Watchman but I'm unclear. Are you arguing for or against a Roman shield being a Tower Shield.Against, obviously. (Mind you, "Roman shield" is rather too vague in the context really as their arsenal naturally included a whole slew of shield designs smaller than the hefty heavy-infantry scutum and clipeus, much the same as the ancient Greeks used a slew of types in addition to the "hoplite" aspis...) Frankly, I don't think they ever used anything that would rate Tower Shield in D&D terms, with the possible exception of some siege equipement.
jerrycutshaw 09-03-07, 01:00 AM	Against, obviously. (Mind you, "Roman shield" is rather too vague in the context really as their arsenal naturally included a whole slew of shield designs smaller than the hefty heavy-infantry scutum and clipeus, much the same as the ancient Greeks used a slew of types in addition to the "hoplite" aspis...) Frankly, I don't think they ever used anything that would rate Tower Shield in D&D terms, with the possible exception of some siege equipement. Thanks Watchman. . . I'll change to a Large Shield for my character. As far a sthe 2 actions arguments above the seem a bit silly to me. I think people are looking at too many "what ifs". The intention and design of it are simple. No attacking while you use the shield for cover end of story. Thanks for the comments guys.
Jaxgaret 09-03-07, 01:16 AM	..and to quote the SRD: "Shield, Tower This massive wooden shield is nearly as tall as you are. 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. The shield does not, however, provide cover against targeted spells; a spellcaster can cast a spell on you by targeting the shield you are holding. You cannot bash with a tower shield, nor can you use your shield hand for anything else." You are correct. I agree that you must "give up all of your attacks." In the SRD quote you show above, where does it say anything about numbers of actions or using actions to make the Tower Shield provide total cover? It doesn't. By your ruling, you can take all your attacks on your turn, then decide to "give up your attacks" until next turn, only forgoing any possible AoOs. Then on your next turn, full attack again, rinse and repeat.
Mind Flayer Monk 09-03-07, 06:03 PM	Quick Question: If you are using the tower shield for total cover, can you be the target of a spell that requires seeing you for example magic missle, dominate person, or hold person? Does an attacker only need to move into a square with LOS on the back corner of your (with tower shield) square to gain LOS for the purpose of spells?
Jaxgaret 09-03-07, 06:51 PM	If you are using the tower shield for total cover, can you be the target of a spell that requires seeing you for example magic missle, dominate person, or hold person? Yes. It says so right in the description of the Tower Shield: The shield does not, however, provide cover against targeted spells; a spellcaster can cast a spell on you by targeting the shield you are holding.
Johnny_Angel 09-03-07, 07:31 PM	In the SRD quote you show above, where does it say anything about numbers of actions or using actions to make the Tower Shield provide total cover? It doesn't. By your ruling, you can take all your attacks on your turn, then decide to "give up your attacks" until next turn, only forgoing any possible AoOs. Then on your next turn, full attack again, rinse and repeat. You're right, it doesn't, but making judgement calls is part of being a DM; I provided what my judgement would be -if I were DMing a game. Since the rules don't specifiy, I thought about how other similar elements of the game work and made a judgement based on how I felt it should work. However, my ruling was such that you would need to have extra actions (via haste, being a choker, etc) to be able to pull that tactic off. Normally, I would not allow a player to use that tactic; however, if they were to attain extra actions, I would allow it as long as they sacrificed the ability to attack with one of their standard actions.
Jaxgaret 09-03-07, 08:38 PM	You're right, it doesn't, but making judgement calls is part of being a DM; I provided what my judgement would be -if I were DMing a game. Since the rules don't specifiy, I thought about how other similar elements of the game work and made a judgement based on how I felt it should work. However, my ruling was such that you would need to have extra actions (via haste, being a choker, etc) to be able to pull that tactic off. Normally, I would not allow a player to use that tactic; however, if they were to attain extra actions, I would allow it as long as they sacrificed the ability to attack with one of their standard actions. Well that's fine as a houserule in your campaign, just don't make as if it is the rules.
Lawkeeper 09-10-07, 04:56 AM	Well, I see as usual tarkin found a way to criticize me. However, I will prove him wrong... again.:rolleyes: Taken right from the FAQ - I underscored and reddified the interesting sentence.;) Total cover prevents any attack against you. You can use a tower shield to get total cover if you give up all your attacks. What does “give up all your attacks” mean? Can you move while getting total cover from the shield? Can you cast a spell? Also, do you get total cover from all directions or from just one side of your square? Will the total cover from a tower shield negate spell effects? Will it negate attacks of opportunity from movement or from other actions such as spellcasting? Will it prevent charge attacks against you? What about bull rush attacks? Can it prevent grapple attacks or snatch attacks? Will it stop fear effects, gaze attacks, or clouds of poison gas? Will it defeat traps? To claim total cover from a tower shield, you must use a standard action. The tower shield rules don’t say that, but that’s what they mean. Since you can take only one standard action each round, you cannot also 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. Like other kinds of cover, the shield has to have a location relative to you on the battlefield. When you use the shield for cover, choose one edge of your space (not a corner). You have total cover against any attack’s line of effect that passes through that side of your space. If an attack’s line of effect goes through the corner of the side of your space that the shield blocks, you get cover from the shield (+4 AC, +2 on Reflex saves) instead of total cover. If an attack’s line of effect passes through a side of your space that the shield does not block, you get no cover from the shield at all. To determine where the line of effect enters your space, draw a line from the attacker’s center to your center. Or, in the case of a magical effect, from the effect’s point of origin and your center. Once you claim cover from the shield, the shield keeps blocking the side of your space that you chose until the beginning of your next turn, when you can again decide whether you’ll use the shield for cover. Once you choose the side of your space that the shield blocks, you cannot change it until your next turn. You continue to threaten the area around you while you use the shield for cover; however, it provides your opponents with the same benefits you get. You cannot make attacks through the side of your space that the shield blocks, and should you attack through the corners of that space, your foe gets cover against your attack. Since cover of any kind prevents attacks of opportunity (see page 151 in the Player’s Handbook), the shield keeps you from making attacks of opportunity in a pretty wide swath. Total cover or cover from a tower shield has the following effects in different situations: • Magical Attacks: A tower shield’s effects on magical attacks depend on the kind of magical attack. Any attack aimed at your equipment is aimed at you. If a magical attack has you as a specific target (that is it does not merely affect the area that contains you but is aimed right at you), the shield has no effect. All rays fall into this category, as does any spell that has a Target entry in its header and any spell that has an Effect entry and affects creatures (provided, of course, that the attacker can and does choose the shield user as a target). Magical attacks that fill areas (bursts, cones, cylinders, lines, emanations, and spreads) are subject to all the rules for cover on page 151 of the Player’s Handbook. Such attacks are completely blocked if line of effect between you and the attack’s point of origin passes through the side of your space the shield blocks. You get cover (+4 AC, +2 on Reflex saves) if the magical attack’s line of effect passes through the corner of the blocked side. Spread effects reach around the shield if they normally would extend into your space, but you still get a Reflex save bonus for cover when they do. A gaze attack is blocked if the shield would give you total cover against attacks from the creature with the gaze attack. If the shield gives you cover only, you’re still subject to the gaze attack (although you could avert or close your eyes to avoid the attack). • Attacks of Opportunity: As noted earlier, cover or total cover prevents attacks of opportunity. So you could, for example, hunker down behind a tower shield and pick up a weapon or rummage around in a backpack and avoid attacks of opportunity against you. If you’re moving while using the shield for cover, things get a little more complicated. You must determine whether the shield gives you cover (or total cover) at the point during your movement when you’d normally provoke an attack of opportunity. Remember that attacks of opportunity are usually resolved before the actions that provoke them. In many cases, the shield won’t be positioned correctly to protect you during your whole move. • Charging and Bull Rushing: Opponents can charge you while you claim cover from the shield. An opponent moves as normal when charging you, moving to the closest square from which a melee attack normally would be possible. If the shield gives you total cover from the attack, the attack automatically fails. Foes can bull rush you normally, moving right into your space in spite of the shield. You normally get an attack of opportunity against someone entering your space, but not if the shield gives your foe cover or total cover. • Grapple and Snatch Attacks: Total cover from a tower shield blocks such attacks (the foe just can’t get hold of you). The foe could, however grab the shield. Conduct such attacks just like any other grapple or snatch attack. Your foe can’t damage you unless he pins you first. You can escape the foe’s hold simply by dropping the shield (a standard action since it’s strapped to your arm), so long as the foe has not pinned you. • Traps: Cover or total cover from a tower shield is just as effective against a trap as it is against any other attack.