To shield, or not to shield
[4 min read]
Tomas started his adventuring career as a Paladin focused on dealing damage with long pointy sticks using Polearm Mastery and Great Weapon fighting style, all in the name of vengeance on behalf of his god, Tyr. Recently Tomas was infused with Arcane power, multiclassing into a Divine Soul Sorcerer, which was a much deliberated character choice (you can see my analysis here). And that is where the theorycrafting stops, right?
Wrong! Tomas is yet again confronted with a potential character-defining choice - whether to use a shield. Ok, so maybe not as character-defining as multiclassing, but one that deserves some analysis.
But first, how did this choice come about?
In our most recent adventure in the Moonsea Madness campaign, while exploring the incredibly disturbing mountain hideaway of the Cult of the Shadowmoon, the party defeated a gelatinous cube (the first in all our player's living memories, across decades of D&D!). The Cube was destroyed, leaving a pile of items from prior adventurers, clearly not as powerful as our heroes, who were engulfed and devoured by the strange ooze. Producing a set of surplus adventuring clothes from his backpack, Tomas tentatively cleaned off the acidic goo left on an intriguing shield, emblazoned with a symbol of an eye. Needless to say the clothes were destroyed, but Tomas claimed a Sentinel Shield for his troubles, a fair trade it would seem.
But those following along might shout - Tomas doesn't use a shield, right?! And true, Tomas wouldn't think too much of it until he was presented with a shield which addresses a couple of major deficiencies - poor initiative (owing to a -1 dexterity modifier), and low passive perception (being 11). The Sentinel Shield provides advantage on initiative and perception checks, and increased passive perception by 5 (back to the party average of 16).
Cue the angst of now choosing between the aforementioned benefits of the shield (not to mention bringing Tomas' Armour Class to a beastly 20 in full plate), and the original thesis of his character - the Great Weapon style polearm wielder.
And you might say - but Tomas can use both options as the situation requires! And you'd be right. And that is what I will do in the next session. But as someone who prides themselves on both optimising their character and sticking to a design and narrative choice when creating them, it almost feels like sullying my original work by having Tomas wield the shield instead of his halberd. Let's dig into the analysis:
BENEFITS
- +2 AC
- Advantage on Initiative
- Advantage on Perception
- Thematic irony - adding a magical eye to a shield for a follower of Tyr (known as the ‘blind god’)
DRAWBACKS
- Reduced damage: -13 damage potential per round (1d8 warhammer vs 1d10 halberd, x2 attacks, and no 1d4+5 bonus damage from Polearm Mastery)
- Reduced damage: cannot reroll 1s and 2s on damage (using Great Weapon fighting style)
- Reduced reach: 5 ft reach with warhammer vs 10 feet with halberd
- Opportunity attacks: no opportunity attack when enemy moves within range (Polearm Mastery)
- Spellcasting: need a free hand to cast spells with Somatic and Material components
- Actions: donning and doffing a shield is a full action, not an interaction
Now that you've layed it out like that, I say ditch the shield and hold true Tomas's polearm mastery.
ReplyDeleteActually I did both in our last session! I kept the shield on between encounters for the extra perception and initiative, then when the situation called for a long battle where the reach and damage mattered, I burned an action to doff the shield and draw my polearm. It paid off over that particular battle.
Delete