And sadly, you aren't the first person to come up with such a lame idea. Where people get the idea that wielding two shields is either cool or effective is beyond my comprehension.
Edit: actually, it seems that even using a shield bash would be a bit of a house rule in 4E. Technically it says that shields arms can't be used to make attacks. Personally, I'd allow you shield bash as an improvised weapon, but certainly don't see how anyone would allow shields to stack in terms of defense.
I'm not your DM, though, so give it a whack and see what yours says!
If I were your DM I'd try a couple of routes:
1. Make a new feat to allow proficiency with shield bashing. The damage and bonus would depend on what kind of shield. Maybe allow you to create custom bashing shields (spikes or somesuch).
2. Recreate the flying shield from 3.5E, that was always a cool item imho.
3. Say the AC bonus from shields does not stack normally, but instead you get a bonus to defense against flanking or opportunity attacks.
4. I'd probably have to sit down and look through fighter powers to see what could work with shield weapons. Off the top of my head I think some club exploits would probably work just as well with a shield, but it'd depend on the individual power.
And sadly, you aren't the first person to come up with such a lame idea. Where people get the idea that wielding two shields is either cool or effective is beyond my comprehension.
...I'd allow you shield bash as an improvised weapon, but certainly don't see how anyone would allow shields to stack in terms of defense.
Once I looked at changing shields from a flat AC+ to increments of coverage (in the 3E sort of way). Then things really started coming together when I considered that a Marilith, with its multiple arms, might do something like have a bow and make her own wall with multiple shields. It'd be like being her own archer/shield-bearer team.
At a more mundane level, if you allow, however, something like oversized arm plates to be small shields (something somewhat common in anime), then someone using small weapons could switch freely from 2-dagger full offensive to dagger/shield balanced offense to shield/shield full defense.
Personally, I think the idea of dual-wielding shields is about as useful as having two mailboxes in front of your house, but I wanna contribute to one of the rare, progressive threads on the website. so here goes.
The point of a shield is to intercept bad guys' attacks, and D&D obviously does not grant AC for the chance to parry with a weapon. It stands to reason then that if you use a shield as a weapon, D&D is designed not to grant AC from it, any more than an impossibly strong fighter swinging a well-trained horse as a two-hander would gain a bonus to riding checks or overland movement speed.
So, to distill my ridiculous analogies, two shields have the combat effectiveness of One shield and one wonkily shaped weapon for which there is no proficiency bonus.
The other option here is to have no weapons, using both shields for... shields, I guess. The problem there is that if the enemy, seeing that you're unarmed and rather ridiculous, chooses not to step around you, you still have no weapon for any of the weapon-keyword tanking abilities.
But! There's hope! Too many people are willing to just do away with an exciting concept just because there's no precedent for it in the rules. If it's gonna make you have more fun, get with your GM on it and make it work, and phooey to me. Good luck!
If it was a glove-like thing than you'd be able to punch with it, but you might also be able to deflect attacks with your hands (since they'd be protected by a layer of steel). Depending on how defensive you want it could be a large glove, a bracer, or even a kind of whole-arm sheath.
How about:
Spiked Gauntlet, +2 bonus, 1d6, Mace Group, +1 AC, superior, off hand
and
Heavy Gauntlet +1 bonus, 1d8, Mace Group, +1 AC, superior
and
Thick Gauntlet +1 bonus, 1d4, Mace Group, +2 AC, superior, off hand
Pic:
If you want to work with the DM to houserule something in, then that's up to you and the DM.
In any boxing movie, where the hero is working out with his sparring partner, and the partner has those big, red, padded hand thingies for the hero to punch, how much of a threat does the sparring partner represent?
My son built a wildly gimped 2-shield paladin in 3.5, which was massively effective because of the way the rules were written (he was doing some ridiculous bonus damage, like, 1d4+20), but I'd never let him play it in my campaign, because I'm having trouble coming up with an example from heroic fiction of anything like this. It makes as much sense as using a shield as a boogie board so you could slide down a staircase and shoot arrows while you were surfing down the stairs.
In any boxing movie, where the hero is working out with his sparring partner, and the partner has those big, red, padded hand thingies for the hero to punch, how much of a threat does the sparring partner represent?
Well being that the guys isn't suppose to be threat, not a lot. Of course if the partner could learn to use his legs and kick the target he might be a wee bit more of a threat.
It makes as much sense as using a shield as a boogie board so you could slide down a staircase and shoot arrows while you were surfing down the stairs.
For most the Rule of Cool supersedes the making sense. Of course it actually has to be 'cool' for you to apply.
---
Back to the topic. Two shields could come into play, in theory, when the player has a character with 3+ arms. This said however the stacking rules come into play as both give a bonus from shields, as it has been mentioned. Feats similar to two-weapon fighting could be developed to take advantage of this with something along the lines of: use the highest AC and add a +1 bonus for every shield used (note that is something off the top of my head).
Why a two armed person would why to wield 2 shields, don't know (also don't like but I'm willing to explore it), one could add a weapon (such as james_gaines posted) that can be used as both a offensive and defensive style (sort of a sword/shield hybrid). That said, any of these weapons used to defend should be treated as shields, not weapons, while the weapons used to attack should be treated as weapons, not shields. It may be able to be a weapon or a shield, it should be able to change between the two 'modes' combat but I don't think they should ever be considered both a weapon and a shield at the same time.
What if they weren't Shields?
What if they were really weapons with an appearance of shields to the unknowing eyes? Two large, sharp disks held in either hand with a flexible handle. Dual wielding these exotic weapons you wade into combat, slashing and stabbing.
These Shield weapons can be used as a shield, however you must declare this ahead of time to get the shield bonus, and they can't be used as a weapon at the same time. Though you could use one as a shield and the other as a weapon.
Another, simliar idea is a Tower shield that is really a double bladed weapon swung around like a staff like handle on the inside. Though it could still be used as a tower shield, (in which case the user can't attack with it) it is actually a weapon.
Heroic:
Dual shields
Pre-req: Dex 13
You are proficient at using two shields at once, you gain full bonus from the one on your on hand, and half bonus for your off hand.
Shield Bash
pre-req: shield proficiency.
when using your shield to bash an opponent, it is not an improvised weapon.
Paragon:
Improved Dual shields
Pre-req: Dual shields
You are proficient at using two shields at once, you gain full bonus from Both shields
Improved Shield Bash
pre-req:shield proficiency
when using your shield as a weapon, it deals 1d6 damage.
...
And sadly, you aren't the first person to come up with such a lame idea. Where people get the idea that wielding two shields is either cool or effective is beyond my comprehension.
...
I recall one Final Fantasy game that required the dual-wielding of shields to quickly level weapon skills. Also, in Phantasy Stars II, III and IV (Not played the first one... yet) there are multiple characters that perform much better with dual shields.
Physical attack power was zero in all cases, but ways the thought can be implanted.
Swear, though, one day I'll get that dual tower shield wielding fighter build, and I'll laugh for days and days....
I mean... wielding 2 weapons gices some sort of advantage, even if you are not a ranger.
In 3.5 it was possible to build a shield striking melee pc, with feats like shield slam and shield charge and so on... it was terribly effective. So if you want to strike with your shield, that's alright... the thing is that carrying a weapon in the other hand is quite more effective, and expectable. If you are not going to improve your AC (I wouldn't allow it), then carry a sword, enemies will think you are going to strike with that (poor them). When someone disarms your sword, show them the truth. Make your pc left-handed, or swap the shield to your right hand so enemies think you are left handed. For me, it's cool, you will fight with a half-smile while you think about how this poor dog is going to be tricked, when you move your sword, his eyes follow it, and suddenly BUM! three shield strikes leave him stunned, knocked and humiliated.
But two shields...
Twin shields is a rather silly idea, in most ideas of combat. You can't use both shields against one attack most of the time (or the blade slipps between them) and two shields takes more iron/steel/whatever to make than shield and sword.
And especially in "normal" warfare they'd be useless except for the shield wall type units who don't attack but hold the shields for their buddies with spears and arrows. (which in 300, we saw that a HUGE shield still worked better.)
Still, this is a game, and the normal rules of warfare do not apply because we play the "heroes" Having two shields can make for a neat character idea, but I wouldn't give it as a DM if you were just trying to make a super-tank. Maybe they practice a weird combat style that's really defensive and such (like tai-chi, but with shields).
Just my opinion.
Imagine two rectangular shields, semi-cylindrical (like Roman scuta), about half a foot longer than the length of your arm. Now, on the bottom side, cut out a triangle so that the bottom now makes a "W" shape. Sharpen the inner edges of the "W" and you've completed the forked end of the shield.
Since the shields run the entire length of the arm, to secure the shield on the arm and still maintain a level of arm mobility, there is a large metal ring near the top of the shield, on the inside. Your arm would go into that ring, where it would sit halfway up your upper arm. It would give enough clearance so that your arm can bend, to a degree. Lower on the inside of the shield would be a fairly standard shield grip.
The large nature of the shields made for good cover and a viable bludgeoning tool, while the edges and the forked points provided lethal damage if needed.
So dual shield wielding is not as ridiculous as it first sounds.
PS. I would include a link here for better visualization, but I can't find any online. However, you can find an article in Inside Kung-Fu Magazine, September 2008 issue, Vol. 36, No. 9.
Plus no one is looking at this in the greater 4e "Defender role in the party" sense. So the Dual shield guy doesn't dish the damage, that isn't necessarily what it's about- there are (hopefully) four other players contributing to the fight and the dual shield may be just the thing to wear down the monsters.
I was thinking I would allow it to stack as a DM, but on second thought I would just remove the combat advantage from flanking enemies. The price? No bashes or special attacks- you get improvised weapons (kicks) and if you use the shield it's an improvised weapon as well, but you lose the advantage.
I might also allow it to stack on reflex defense as well.
I would definitely like to see it in my game, I like it when the players do interesting things that aren't purely for cheese. If nothing else to see how it works.
Pretty woefully unheroic, unfortunately.
In any boxing movie, where the hero is working out with his sparring partner, and the partner has those big, red, padded hand thingies for the hero to punch, how much of a threat does the sparring partner represent?
Well if the big red mitts were made of heavy wood or steel and had metal spikes on them...
Actually, the idea of dual shields in reality is not as far-fetched as most people believe. In Chinese martial arts, there is a weapon known as the double tiger's head shield (named because of the tiger's head design emblazoned on the front).
So dual shield wielding is not as ridiculous as it first sounds.
PS. I would include a link here for better visualization, but I can't find any online. However, you can find an article in Inside Kung-Fu Magazine, September 2008 issue, Vol. 36, No. 9.
That is actually pretty interesting, but I should point out that the Chinese have fighting sets using the abacus as well. That doesn't mean it makes sense for a party of adventurers going around killing dragons with counting devices. The unique history of China is one where they most people didn't have access to military weapons throughout alot of their history because of fear of rebellion. They made due with what they had, including alot of farming equipment. But a peasant using what it has available to defend himself against bandits is alot different than well equiped adventurer who kills monsters for a living.
The point is not whether someone could defend himself with a shield if they had to, or even design a light shield to maximize it's potential as an offensive weapon like the Chinese maximize the damage a cane can do by sharpening the end. The point is that whenever someone brings up dual-shields, it seems more like they are trying to get some sort of mechanical advantage out of the system, usually based off of a misunderstanding of how the rules work (but not always in 3.5), than are actually trying to make anything even slightly either realistic or cool cinematically.
But if someone came to me with a idea of incorporating something similar to double tiger head shields as a unique weapon for them to wield, I would work with them to make it a somewhat effective weapon (probably at the cost of at least one feat), but even then probably wouldn't give any special AC bonuses. If they came up the idea of just having two heavy shields and expect it to work in combat, I certainly wouldn't bend the rules to make such a fighting style in anyway functional.
My group also plays Warmachine, and the Kodiak and Devastator Warjacks employ two shields and look pretty badarsed.
I was thinking of how to incorporate this idea into 4ed. I cant remember what it was called, but WAY back in the day, there was a dwarf advanced class in the warrior splat book of 2nd ed, that would charge into combat with spiked armourn and grapple, headbutt his opponents. (I think there was even a secondary character in one of the novels, {Dragonlance or FR I can't remember.})
I would make him like that.
I think it's in one of the 3e FR books as a prestige class but the character in question I believe was in a forgotten realms storyline.
If you attack with one of the shields I don't see anyway you could get a shield bonus from it. That said I would definitely urge to be able to have both bonuses stack to AC when you are not attacking with both.
I don't see how others would view you as less of a threat either. It would quickly become apparent that those spikes are being used as weapons.
It is rather wrong to call the idea lame...or unheroic. There is no reason to flame other people because they have a different perspective of it in actual play. If you think shields in our real life history were used only for defense then your logic is severely flawed. I can see merit to using two shields with shield spikes/razors or whatever.
If you attack with one of the shields I don't see anyway you could get a shield bonus from it. That said I would definitely urge to be able to have both bonuses stack to AC when you are not attacking with both.
I don't see how others would view you as less of a threat either. It would quickly become apparent that those spikes are being used as weapons.
I didn't attack anyone personally, and if had an idea that was dumb and wouldn't work either in theory or rules wise, I'd hope someone tell me so.
And sure, you could hurt someone who was dumb enough to let themselves be impaled on some spiked shield, but good luck trying to get someone stand still long enough for that to work. The pushing aspect of some of the fighter shield powers I think capture the aspect of how they were used in combat more than any damaging shield bashes would be.
There is a reason why there is only one example of dual shields being used in practice that anyone can bring up (and it is a rare style even in the region it comes from), and that is that dual wielding shield is usually nowhere as effective as having a weapon and a shield. You just don't get either the maneuverability or the reach that one would get with almost any other weapon.
As for tiger's head shield, it was the edge that was sharpened, so you would turn the shield on its side to use it as weapon. In other words, the one example of dual-shields doesn't even use a spiked shield setup to begin with.
As for gaining stacking shield bonuses, that makes little sense. First off, how can two shields help you against one opponent? You should probably be fighting in profile to prevent getting hit in the first place. Second, having two shields halves the maneuverability of each one, as they would get in the way of one another. Third, how you keeping track on when they are being used as weapons or defense? You could do so, but it seems like a pain in the arse. Fourth, there is the balance issue to consider. Gaining an extra +2 ac is really good for a defender, to the point where everyone would probably want such defense. Yet the very rarity of dual shield fighting indicates that such a combat style was not probably an optimal one.
It also very much violates the stacking rules, and I don't see why realism or cinematic considerations should make on change the rules here, since realistic they probably weren't harder to hit, and cinematically it doesn't even sound very cool either in most cases.
Again though, the best I can see is some version of a tiger head shield put into practice, and it would probably be a 1d6 damage axe which can be turned into a light shield or back again as a minor action, and whose AC bonuses didn't stack.
This is an old idea, but not a senseless one. Enough people liked this idea that it was actually a feat chain in the Iron Heroes campaign setting. With a five feat investment you could gain AC bonuses from both shields while attacking with both. So it's been done and is actually an enjoyable character to play. I played a dual shield weilding Armiger.
I'm guessing a +2 bonus to hit (or the -2 penalty to hit this would entail) doesn't mean as much in Iron Heroes as it does in 4e. sliding the chance to hit over two points in this edition is a big, big change.
I didn't attack anyone personally, and if had an idea that was dumb and wouldn't work either in theory or rules wise, I'd hope someone tell me so.
And sure, you could hurt someone who was dumb enough to let themselves be impaled on some spiked shield, but good luck trying to get someone stand still long enough for that to work. The pushing aspect of some of the fighter shield powers I think capture the aspect of how they were used in combat more than any damaging shield bashes would be.
There is a reason why there is only one example of dual shields being used in practice that anyone can bring up (and it is a rare style even in the region it comes from), and that is that dual wielding shield is usually nowhere as effective as having a weapon and a shield. You just don't get either the maneuverability or the reach that one would get with almost any other weapon.
As for tiger's head shield, it was the edge that was sharpened, so you would turn the shield on its side to use it as weapon. In other words, the one example of dual-shields doesn't even use a spiked shield setup to begin with.
As for gaining stacking shield bonuses, that makes little sense. First off, how can two shields help you against one opponent? You should probably be fighting in profile to prevent getting hit in the first place. Second, having two shields halves the maneuverability of each one, as they would get in the way of one another. Third, how you keeping track on when they are being used as weapons or defense? You could do so, but it seems like a pain in the arse. Fourth, there is the balance issue to consider. Gaining an extra +2 ac is really good for a defender, to the point where everyone would probably want such defense. Yet the very rarity of dual shield fighting indicates that such a combat style was not probably an optimal one.
It also very much violates the stacking rules, and I don't see why realism or cinematic considerations should make on change the rules here, since realistic they probably weren't harder to hit, and cinematically it doesn't even sound very cool either in most cases.
Again though, the best I can see is some version of a tiger head shield put into practice, and it would probably be a 1d6 damage axe which can be turned into a light shield or back again as a minor action, and whose AC bonuses didn't stack.
The thing is...as long as shields have been around they have been used as a weapon.
The thing is...as long as shields have been around they have been used as a weapon.
So why are there no historical accounts of anyone using two shields on a battlefield? They've been around forever, and are common to every civilization that ever made war, so why didn't the technique emerge in any but one tiny, isolated case?
Your two shields would just get in each other's way. You can only get any benefit from interposing one shield between you and a weapon. Getting two shields in there MIGHT absorb a bit more of a blow, just from having both arms in there, but you can get the same benefit by bracing your sword behind your shield.
That's full-sized shields... If we're talking bucklers, it MIGHT be more effective, since they wouldn't be in each other's way as often, but, again, you're left without a weapon, and therefore will be stepped around and ignored by any semi-intelligent critter.
Tell ya what... I've got shields in my garage. I even, coincidentally, have some shields slung for use right-handed. (I fight lefty, hubby fights righty.) Come on over. I'll give you a sword and a shield, and whack you a few times, give you a feel for blocking with a shield. Then, we'll swap over, and you can play with two shields, see how it feels.
Come up with a bugbear and you're on. After all there is nothing more fun then throwing a lock and some picks on the table and going "skill check that". I wouldn't let my wife take "Split the Tree" with her ranger- not only could she not hit two seperate targets with two arrows, but splitting an arrow was beyond her.
So yeah, totally see your point.
Come up with a bugbear and you're on. After all there is nothing more fun then throwing a lock and some picks on the table and going "skill check that". I wouldn't let my wife take "Split the Tree" with her ranger- not only could she not hit two seperate targets with two arrows, but splitting an arrow was beyond her.
So yeah, totally see your point.
I certainly wouldn't expect a novice to automatically be proficient with shields, either one or two of 'em, however, even a novice with half a brain would be able to compare the relative difficulty in using one or using two.
Come up with a bugbear and you're on. After all there is nothing more fun then throwing a lock and some picks on the table and going "skill check that". I wouldn't let my wife take "Split the Tree" with her ranger- not only could she not hit two seperate targets with two arrows, but splitting an arrow was beyond her.
So yeah, totally see your point.
I think not so much.
I agree with person upstream who asked how much, if any, we have examples of people using two full melee-defensive-appropriate shields, or using even one shield as a fully offensive weapon?
Basically a novel idea came to me, a dual shield fighter tank!
It is not a novel idea, it has been suggested and discussed many, many times.
IMO it is entirely a meta-concept and I wouldn't allow it for that reason.
ThorDiantral
Id see if my DM would allow me to create a weapon that incorporates a buckler of some sort into the design. Duel wielding them though not truly 2 shields would be approximate and rather interesting.
Balance may be a factor, but I think that getting both AC bonuses if you do not strike, getting one if you hit with one and none if you hit with both is appropriate. Also i think a set of Dual-Shield powers and feats are in order.
This concept will require quite a bit of fabrication, but I enjoy doing that. If the idea is balanced and the player runs with the idea, you know he is in it for the concept. If the idea is balanced and he does not use it, he was looking for a meta-advantage.
But on a serious note, without a custom 3.5 exotic weapon shield, don't wield a shield. Plus in 4.0 you can't put weapon enchantments on it.
Wielding shields is not lame! Two words, CAPTIAN AMERICA! And the A on his helmet doesn't stand for France!
How about Eric, the Cavalier, from the Dungeons and Dragon's cartoon? Although to be fair, the only people who had weapons on that show didn't actually hurt anyone with them.
And Captain America seems a little better armed now days anyway.
http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/7696/newcap2sh4.jpg
Both examples are from a bygone age when violence media aimed at children was actually frowned upon. If the D&D cartoon was remade today, I'm sure Eric would have a sword which he would use to decapitate, severe limbs and disembowel people.
I'm guessing a +2 bonus to hit (or the -2 penalty to hit this would entail) doesn't mean as much in Iron Heroes as it does in 4e. sliding the chance to hit over two points in this edition is a big, big change.
Atually a +2 to hit or to AC is a big deal in Iron Heroes as there are no magical enhancements because there is no magical equipment. All an IH character gets is BAB + ability mod to hit. And a five feat investment is pretty big to get a +2 to AC and the ability to attack with shields.