[3.5] What would this rule.do to the game?

[Mr Adventurer]

When you're using a shield, when you are attacked you decide whether you are using your shield to parry or to block. If parrying, the shield adds a bonus to AC as normal. If blocking, you do not gain a shield bonus to AC and instead attacks that hit first strike and damage your shield. A shield reduced to 0hp is destroyed. Any damage left over after destroying a shield is applied to you as though you had been hit by the attack.

[Korivan]

Makes more sense in a realism sense but game mechanics wise...? Unsure. Do they get to block everyone's first strike, or just the one in front?

[Mr Adventurer]

Makes more sense in a realism sense but game mechanics wise...? Unsure. Do they get to block everyone's first strike, or just the one in front?

There's no facing, so any attack to which the shield would apply.

[Inevitability]

I think it makes blocking too effective, realism-wise. If Archwarlord Gar'zulk, Lord of the Black Pits, decides to attack a 1st level fighter, and that fighter tries to block the attack, Gar'zulk should be able to avoid the shield and go straight for the fighter.

I'd instead make it so that blocking makes your opponent roll twice for his attacks. First to see if he avoids the shield (if he wants to hit it, skip this roll) and then to see if he hits you.

[TIPOT]

Isn't this basically giving everyone damage reduction 10/adamantine? So at higher levels won't make much difference, low levels is pretty much impossible for none casters to hurt anyone as everyone will be packing shields as DR10 is so good early. Clerics become God tier early (or more so). It gets worse at level 3ish where you can afford an adamantine shield for DR 20 instead. How would ring of force shielding work?

[Xervous]

When you're using a shield, when you are attacked you decide whether you are using your shield to parry or to block. If parrying, the shield adds a bonus to AC as normal. If blocking, you do not gain a shield bonus to AC and instead attacks that hit first strike and damage your shield. A shield reduced to 0hp is destroyed. Any damage left over after destroying a shield is applied to you as though you had been hit by the attack.

Note: there's a feat that applies your shield bonus against reflex saves or touch attacks, would it be fair to interpret this as allowing the shielded combatant to absorb such spells on his shield first?

If you're toting a heavy steel shield at low levels (hardness 10, HP 20) you're basically immune to ranged attacks. It's unlikely that any single ranged attack will break 20 damage, thus the shield will remained unscathed. The threshold of 10 damage for melee attacks is much easier to reach but it's still going to give your character tons of extra effective health for the cost of the shield. Viewed as proactive healing a 20gp heavy steel shield will at least absorb 30 points of damage, the equivalent of roughly 3 charges from a wand of lesser vigor (45gp equiv), except it's also temp HP and that's the minimum value you're getting out of it. The downside of losing a hand for THF will cut away a decent chunk of your damage turning everything into turtle pokes. If a build or enemy monster can't consistently break that 10 damage threshold they're doing jack diddly.

TLDR: It's a massive cheap brick of temp hp that screws over archers, electricity cold and fire damage.


At later levels when you have GP to throw at it you can make a shield with effective HP well into the hundreds.
+Aurorum, so when it breaks you just put the damn thing back together. (4000 gp)
+Boost it up to +5 enhancement with magic vestments. This adds 10 hardness. (variable)
+Mix in pure ore when it's being forged, double the base hardness and hitpoints. (now base 20 hardness, 40 hitpoints) (6000 gp)
+Make it dwarvencraft, +2 hardness and +10 hp, not sure on the interaction with pure ore so it's either 22/24 hardness and 50/60 hp. (300 gp)
+Zap it with CL 20 hardening, +10 hardness. (scroll, 1650 gp)

Without the magic vestments boost this shield costs us less than 20k. I'm sure there's more things to sneak in here for added durability but the point should get across.

32 hardness and 50 hp to the shield. At a bare minimum this is 82 temp hp you're holding on your arm. Any melee hit that fails to break 32 fizzles, ranged attacks along with lightning and fire need to break 64 to tickle the shield (maximized CL 10 fireball does jack all), and you're basically immune to cold damage requiring a single hit in excess of 128 to have any lasting damage on the shield.

If this also applies for targeted spells you're picking up the object's immunity to things that target fort saves much in the same manner as if you were undead.


In short, this turns anyone carrying a shield into an absurdly massive chunk of HP. It will slow the game down exponentially, gimp archers horribly, and render most blasting energy types useless.


EXTRA:
Swap the Aurorum for good old Addy and tack on magic vestments for lulz
62 hardness, 140 hit points. Dear god...

[Uncle Pine]

Why hasn't anyone already mention riverine shields? Riverine is immune to damage and nothing short of Disintegration, a rod of cancellation, a sphere of annihilation or a Mordenkainen's Disjunction can destroy it, so it should probably be mentioned.

[Xervous]

Why hasn't anyone already mention riverine shields? Riverine is immune to damage and nothing short of Disintegration, a rod of cancellation, a sphere of annihilation or a Mordenkainen's Disjunction can destroy it, so it should probably be mentioned.

We have a winner.

[Necroticplague]

Why hasn't anyone already mention riverine shields? Riverine is immune to damage and nothing short of Disintegration, a rod of cancellation, a sphere of annihilation or a Mordenkainen's Disjunction can destroy it, so it should probably be mentioned.

Dangit, that's what I thought the second I read the OP. Beat me to it.

[ericgrau]

I'd have a bag of holding full of disposable shields and stop taking damage. Damaged ones would go back into the bag to get repaired later. Probably get the cleric to cast make whole, or get him an item for more spells or a wand or etc. An adamantine shield has 30 hardness and 26 hp. A heavy steel shield costing next to nothing has 20 hp and 10 hardness which is plenty for low level. For many levels you could be invincible. At mid levels it could still prevent a huge amount of damage. At higher level you could carry a one handed weapon with the plans to switch to THF as soon as your shield shatters. Or switch to adamantine at that level. If it breaks, which is hard until super high level, make whole it good as new.

Or yeah you get riverine and you're invincible. Or a ring of force shield. Or once those get banned there are still a million other things you can do to strengthen your shield. Even the un-strengthened ones are pretty broken.

Like most random ideas it creates a total mess.

[LTwerewolf]

I offer a feat that lets them forego their AC for an opposed attack roll using the shield, which uses up their attack of opportunity. Creates some interesting dex shield builds. Only applies to touch attacks if the shield would normally apply to them, so via feats and enchants and whatnot.

[KillianHawkeye]

When you're using a shield, when you are attacked you decide whether you are using your shield to parry or to block. If parrying, the shield adds a bonus to AC as normal. If blocking, you do not gain a shield bonus to AC and instead attacks that hit first strike and damage your shield. A shield reduced to 0hp is destroyed. Any damage left over after destroying a shield is applied to you as though you had been hit by the attack.

This is sort of a nonsensical rule. Parrying and blocking are essentially the same thing, although the word 'parrying' more commonly refers to using your weapon for the action (see: fencing).

EDIT: It also kinda makes tower shields irrelevant, since those already have built-in rules for trading their AC bonus for cover.