Shield Size

Zeira · Post by **Zeira** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:57 am

This isn't about turteling exactly so I'm posting it in it's own thread...

So I was at Melissa and Adam's on Friday and was checking out one of their shields because I plan on using one next year. It's a round shield, 28" diameter. Melissa pointed out that the shield was to large for me to use because it extended past my shoulders. I was

But then I decided to do some math. I measured my chin to the the floor while on my knees (Insert joke here) and the width of my shoulders. My results were 38" from chin to the floor and 22" from shoulder to shoulder. That would mean that the largest shiel I could legally use would have a surface area of 836 inches. The round shield would only have a surface area of 617". That's about 25% smaller than a max size shield would be for me.

So I guess where I'm going with this is that I want to use the round shield. And I feel I or anybody else in this situation should be allowed to because it's smaller than what a shield built at maximum specs would be. I know this seems complicated but...

Measure a PC's width at their shoulders and from their chin to the floor. Figure out what the max size shield they can use is and put it on their character sheet.

Shields will have the surface area they cover on the shield, on a tag. If it's surface area is larger than your max shield size than you can't use it.

Example:

Bob notices his friend Tom has dropped in battle and wants to use Tom's shield. After getting permission from Tom to use the phys rep Bob looks at the back of the shield to check size. The max shield size Bob can use is 660 inches. The tag on the back of the shield says it's surface area is 700 inches. Bob can't legally use the shield in combat so places the shield back down.

Thoughts?

cole45 · Post by **cole45** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 12:02 pm

I see a few logistical issues.

1. Tags. The physical specs on a tag. Now you need to make a new tag if you get a new shield phyrep? meh.

2, keeping track of each character's survace area is a ...pain. but measuing their shield with knees and shoulders is easy.

Zeira · Post by **Zeira** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 12:49 pm

1. It could just be a piece of paper that says "600" that denotes the size of the phys rep with a GM's initials. All shields should be measured before a PC uses them anyway and to check if it's safe. Takes about a 2 minutes to measure the shield and create the tag and have a GM sign off on it.

2. Surface area is easy to keep track of, just write it on your character sheet next in other notes section. It takes 2 minutes to do it and it's not like the number is ever going to change.

General Maximus · Post by **General Maximus** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:51 pm

Interesting idea, but will not work. I can create a shield that meets the proposed surface area rule that would protect around 90% to 95% of legal striking areas on my body.

Becasue of this, surface area is not a good idea.

The current rules make sure there is at least 25% legal striking area on a person no matter what shape your shield is. By using a round shield, you are limiting your protection. Use a different shape to increase your shield protection. Oval would work!

Zeira · Post by **Zeira** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 2:11 pm

A max size square shield now currently covers everything but your shins. And if you bend your knees a little you pretty much have full coverage. What does your design look like? How does it give more coverage? A kite shield may seem like it grants more coverage but it doesn't, the way you fight with it does.

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 3:41 pm

you'd make the shield longer by reducing the size on the lower half of the shield (rear leg is protected by distance). Possibly, assuming you had some spare, you could expand the upper oprtion as well to protect the shoulders. Even could make a notch in the upper middle as the head isn't legal.

Another issue is the guy who makes a shield over 5ft tall and thiner and just swings it back and forth. It's kinda dumb but has been semi-viable in the past.

Basically, we have tried that idea in the past and people just get stupid with it after awhile. It's not a bad idea in theory, but in real life practice doesn't work well. So yeah, good idea, but not really a viable one.

tl;dr: We'd have shields that looked like lego constructs.

Atrum Draconus · Post by **Atrum Draconus** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:13 pm

How do you get 25% uncovered area? The way the rules work right now the only thing that will be open is the shins, as the shield moves farther away from the body even that is cut down.

Zeira · Post by **Zeira** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:19 pm

I guess you could say that shields can't be longer or wider than the distance between your chin and the ground while on your knees. Then you limit the possibilites of silly looking shields that are there just to min/max.

Dallid · Post by **Dallid** » Tue Dec 15, 2009 10:32 am

I’m inclined to say either different rules need to be used for different shield shapes, or shield legality just has to depend on the mark one eyeball.

A square tower shield should be at least a couple inches shy of shoulder width, and probably no taller than knees to armpits. If it’s as wide as the shoulders, the only defensive motion necessary against a single foe is an up-down shift – way too easy. If you must move your shield up and down and side to side to defend yourself, now it’s a challenge and your foe has a decent chance to land an occasional blow.

A round shield can have a width that extends beyond your arms, however. The shape of the shield will tend to leave both shoulders, legs, and hips open when centered. Such a shield has to be maneuvered all over the place to defend against incoming hits. If the shield, however, is so large that you cannot see both shoulders, legs, and hips when centered, then it is covering too much area.

Likewise a kite shield can be wider than the shoulders. It tapers to a tip, so if held at shoulder height, it leaves a great deal of area below the chest exposed. In a centered position, the top of the shield should end well below the shoulders, leaving the shoulders, upper chest, hips, and legs open. Like the round shield, the kite’s shape requires it to be maneuvered all over the place to block inbound hits.

All in all, a shield probably shouldn’t cover more than 50% of legal hit area and leave vulnerable areas both vertically and horizontally. If you barely have to move a shield to ward off all hits from a single foe, I’d call it a cheddar cheat shield.

General Maximus · Post by **General Maximus** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:39 am

The 25% is both shines and your sword arm.

Dallid · Post by **Dallid** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:53 am

If the shield is as wide as the shoulders, then the sword arm is not vulnerable when the player is not attacking, and the shins require a unsafe lunging attack to hit if the attacker is using a weapon shorter than a pike or pole arm. So I'd consider a shield that leaves only the sword arm and shins 'vulnerable' as offering 100% coverage.

General Maximus · Post by **General Maximus** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:03 pm

Yes,

You would have 100% coverage if you hide behind a shield, not attacking, knee's bent, and a person is attacking you with 1 short sword. But the shield person is really not doing in battle besides being a target. And that person better not be kneeling or bending alot at the waist becasue than they are turtling becasue their head is at waist level to an attacker.
When fighting with a shield, you should avoid leaning forward or bending at the waist much becasue you will put your head in the path of weapons. Not a good idea.

And what do you do against a target, you boom them!!!

And to safely hit a peson's lower legs is to use a max length short sword or longer weapon. Long swords are great for that! But if you are attacking with a shield, you are a minium exposing 25% of yourself or more.

I get hit on my sword arm, lowr legs, shoulders, and back when I'm using a shield. And I still get hurt, but not as much as I would I was just using a single weapon.

Are shields at FH great and can protect a person well. Yes. But there are some many mechaincal ways to ger around shields it should not be a big deal. Shields are big targets and great for packet driven attack's

How useful is a shield against a bunch of empath's if you do not have resist magic. What about fear? Everyting is considered crush while you are feared. Good luck on dodge hits when you have a shield while feared.
Disarm is a shield killer. You are doing anything when you are just holding a shield with no weapon. You are basicly taken out of the battle at that time.

If there where not ingame mechanial methods to get around shields, than I would say they are to big. But since there are, I don't see that there is an issue with shields. But the shields must be with in the current shield rules. Any shields that breaks the rules should not be used.

Zeira · Post by **Zeira** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:41 pm

So I'm guessing that the general thought on the matter is such a system would not work for logistical reasons and because people will cheese the rules to min/max shields that look silly. Luckily the current shield size regulations are more of a guideline than a rule so I guess thats good. That way the GM's have the discression over what shields make it into game. I'm content with that. I just thought it would make it easier for people to use their friends shields or oddly shaped shields, but it does seem like a waste to create a whole rule for such a rare occasion.

Dallid · Post by **Dallid** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 4:17 pm

Yes, there are a number of ways to overcome a shield that offers 100% protection: Outflank, large boom, crush or other surge attack, but most of the time a warrior will be facing off against a single pud NPC.

NPCs seldom have the numbers to gang up on a single PC, and having boom or surge attack ability or support is not the usual case. So normally a PC with 100% shield coverage is practically invincible.

The PC either knows or quickly learns to strike only when the NPC is distracted or in the process of striking. When in the process of striking, the blow can't be redirected toward the suddenly exposed PC sword arm, so the arm is safe. And if the shield is held a foot or more away from the ankles, the feet can't be struck from a standing angle, no matter what weapon is in use during the melee.

Anyway, yeah, I don't think a hard-set rule of numbers and measurements can be applied to shields due to the shear variety in sizes and shapes of shields and players.

Best bet, I think, is for multiple GMs to go one-on-one with a sheild-bearing PC to determine if the shield is playable (can also determine if the weapon is safe!). Or just keep a critical eye during the game and bring up the shield issue with the other GMs if one seems insermountable.

That just leaves pontential trouble if a small player is using a larger player's shield. But how often does that come up? I've rarely noticed PCs using other PC's shields, and never for long. PC's with shields will want their's back quickly when they're back in the fight. PC's who normally don't use shields want to be rid of them quickly. PC's who lose their shields and pick up a new one just use their own phys rep again.

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 4:26 pm

Except a good PC could use an obviously under sized shield and still best all of the GMs. Probably, multiple of the GMs at the same time. Nothing against them.

Also, on NPCs playing puds. A single NPC a a single pud is cannon fodder anyway. A warrior doesn't even need a shield to counter them. Defensive Matrix, and let your healer (or destroyer of towns) buddy kill him with a polearm or long sword (not to be confused with a longsword).

Secondly, how often do NPCs wield single weapons?