Which came first, the shield, the sword, or the spear? I think the sword can be thrown out of that question. The shield goes back as far 10,000 years ago and, due to the lack of information in the archeological record, we can’t really know much about shield use prior to that point. I would submit that the shield is such a simple and useful device that its development would have coincided with the spear. Minimally, the shield would have coincided with the advent of and scale of warfare. It, along with the spear, are the two staples of man. The spear and shield combination are probably the most used and the most effective war making weapon combination invented until the advent of modern weaponry – by that I mean the gun.
The primary use of a shield is to stop a pointy object, blunt object, or sharp object from impacting the skin and body thus preventing serious damage. One might think that shield design would be very simple and straight forward. On one level it is. Any object that can be held and creates a barrier is a shield. At another level, shield design is fairly complex. This is why we have shield changing in size, shape, weight, material, and function over time.
Some shields are very light weight and made of rather flimsy material. These shields were designed primarily to deflect blows, not to stop them nor absorb them but to deflect them. Other shields are heavy, large, and made of thick wood planking. This design element is primarily used to absorb the impact of spears and arrows. The range between is vast. Shields were designed for very specific purposes, fighting styles, and the types of weapons one expected to encounter on a battlefield.
The round shield is the most common shape one finds around the world and throughout time. Its size would very but the round proved a very effective shield for those fighting on the ground and in looser formations. Rectangular shields (such as the scotum) and oval shields were primarily used in mass formations. The kite shield was mostly used by mounted knights or warriors. Later the heater shield pretty much replaced them all before being discarded as it offered little to no effective defense against firearms. There are thousands of variations between.
In game the shield can be used for defense (adding to AC) or occasionally used offensively. The typical range is +1 to +2 AC with a few +3 modifiers thrown in there for good measure. The pavis has a +6. The latter is something my son (10 years old) noticed and bought one for his character. I explained he couldn’t carry it and it was bulky etc. He disagreed and we looked it up. You could have thrown me in a barrel of boiling monkeys and I would not have been more surprised. Even though a pavisar was used to carry one for a bowman, yes, someone could carry that bulky thing. It did not help my case that the character was a six and half foot tall half-orc with a 17 strength. I gave up the discussion and let his character use the pavis.
But it got my brain a wriggling like worms in a pan of Crisco over an open fire. Is this all the shield has to offer? Is this it? The single most used piece of defensive armor ever created (still in use today), does nothing but add a few points to a character’s armor class.
I think perhaps this should change. But, I am always complicating things that need not be complicated. Though, to be honest, I always feel a bit envious of those people who play spell casters because they get to sit at the table spending a long time pouring over books and lists of spells and effects trying to decide which one to cast while those playing the fighter just get to roll a d20. I think it would be cool if the warriors would have those options. Which weapon do I draw? How do a use the shield? Which maneuver am I going to try? Just, I would like a few more options for the fighter classes. Or maybe, just maybe, take away some options from the spell casters.
Yeah, yeah, I like that idea way better.
 |
No comments:
Post a Comment