Isn't it strange a shield dwarf has no shield proficiency?

[psibot]

Just was following an Idea I had and was surprised a shield dwarf has no shield proficiency sorta funny why they called shield dwarf?

[mayrc]

The name doesn’t refer to combat shield but from their origin.

[bullse]

OMG. SHIELD Dwarf has nothing to do with a shield, nothing. LMAO.

[Suralle]

Yes, it's strange. While that has nothing to do with their background, it's still strange :-)

[psibot]

Well I vaguely remember Bruenor Battlehammer being a shield dwarf with he could call infinite ale? but I really assumed it to be a clan trait ;)....

[Soft Lockpick]

Rename them to Medium Armor Dwarf. I'll sign the petition.

[mayrc]

Messaggio originale di Soft Lockpick:

Rename them to Medium Armor Dwarf. I'll sign the petition.

Made me laugh! Nice one 😂

[Coldhands]

Tieflings don’t throw ties. High Elves are sober. Wood Elves are flesh and bone.

[Soft Lockpick]

Messaggio originale di Coldhands:

High Elves are sober.

Citation needed

[dolby]

Messaggio originale di Pumis:

Shield as racial proficiency would be bit too strong in 5e

yeah, like that would be the only broken thing in 5E lol

[mayrc]

Messaggio originale di dolby:

Messaggio originale di Pumis:

Shield as racial proficiency would be bit too strong in 5e

yeah, like that would be the only broken thing in 5E lol

Guys this thread is about to become comedy.
@OP really this isn’t meant disrespectful or in any way trolling. Your question was absolutely viable if your new to DnD. Please don’t take offense

[dolby]

Messaggio originale di Pumis:

Messaggio originale di dolby:

yeah, like that would be the only broken thing in 5E lol

5e is one of the most balanced edition out there. Shield for casters and rogues would mean ridiculously high AC for normally fragile class. That is +2AC in edition where AC is generally low. +2AC is equivalent of shield of faith spell. Basically you would be giving free shield of faith for these classes.

Edit:
4 attribute points... 2 of them in con which is very useful for all classes.
Darkvision.
Light and medium armor proficiency..
Dwarven Resilience..
Adding shield proficiency there would just be broken.
That would mean that you can have a mage with AC 19 at level 1.
14 dex = +2 dex modifier
Gith armor 15+dex = 17
17+2 from shield = 19

yeah i get it, but so what? You can get high AC as is even without shields... If you ask me (i'm no expert btw) 5e feels like it's trying to play it safe but it's not after all it can't.

Balance goes out the window really fast shown by things like push and other stuff.

I mean the quality of life changes are nice and all... But if you playing a game with high fantasy it's kind of clear that balance will be off from the get-go. Just my thinking... And for this game right now the highest AC is irrelevant as the mobs always go for the lowest if they can AI need lots of work.

I'm more at odds with how you can't use shields i mean the no casting thing is a huge penalty and it feels weird to me.
Don't get me even started on how you can cast a spell then equip the shield and just bypass all that mumbo jumbo rule... talk about broken. :) Hopefully they change that.
I would never thought i would say this: i miss Arcane Spell Failure! But here we are... i did it.:)

[Soft Lockpick]

People complaining about +2 AC as potentially game breaking in a game with explosive barrels that let you one shot encounters is going to warrant a chuckle.

[dolby]

Messaggio originale di Soft Lockpick:

People complaining about +2 AC as potentially game breaking in a game with explosive barrels that let you one shot encounters is going to warrant a chuckle.

hehe yeah and that as well :)

[dolby]

Messaggio originale di Pumis:

Highest AC irrelevant? It still reduces chance of being hit, so it's always relevant. You rather want whole team to have as high AC as possible.

Well, right now you can control the battlefield with the lowest AC way better then you can with a highest one just saying... bad AI.

Messaggio originale di Pumis:

"I'm more at odds with how you can't use shields i mean the no casting thing is a huge penalty and it feels weird to me."
With proficiency you can cast.

yeah i know that, Made an edit you can do it even without it. hopefully they fix that.

And there is no cover system and no one is complaining about no Ac bonus from that, so +2 ac apparently isn't that important just saying :)) cos it's same as half cover. Lets not get in to three-quarters cover +5 ac.

[dolby]

Messaggio originale di Pumis:

Messaggio originale di dolby:

Well, right now you can control the battlefield with the lowest AC way better then you can with a highest one just saying... bad AI.


yeah i know that, Made an edit you can do it even without it. hopefully they fix that.

And there is no cover system and no one is complaining about no Ac bonus from that, so +2 ac apparently isn't that important just saying :)) cos it's same as half cover. Lets not get in to three-quarters cover +5 ac.

"Well, right now you can control the battlefield with the lowest AC way better then you can with a highest one just saying... bad AI."
Why not have them all high? Also high AC was never used to control battlefield.

"yeah i know that, Made an edit you can do it even without it. hopefully they fix that."
That is 5e legal thing, not related to BG3.

Ah I see.. You're just trolling. Ignored.

What? how is itnot related to BG 3 its based on 5e ?? How am i trolling i'm talking about BG 3... You do know this is Bg 3 forum not DnD 5e forum? Amazing...