Doing shields right in the game, bigger = better? No.

[Stiler]

I would like to talk about shields.

 

Throughout history shields have been an important part of combat, there are many types of shields from your small bucklers to the larger tower shields and so on.Shields had many differences amongst them and ways in which they were used for various combats. Shields did not have to be big, and bigger shields did not mean the shield was better.

 

In most rpg games that is how it is though. The bigger the shield, the better it is. You usually get small bucklers early on that are crappy, and later on get into tower shields and the like that are treated as better shields. This is just not how shields actually are. Each shield type had both advantages and disadvantages.

 

Bucklers for example, are very small and light shields. They were used for the longest time throughout history, longer then any other shield type. Bucklers were held in your hand (Rather then being strapped to your arm like larger shields) and with the lightness/speed of it was also a very offensive weapon as well as defense. The bucklers could be varied, from having a spike on the front, sharp edges around it (that could cut) to having a latch that could catch weapons and things. Also because it was simply held in your hand, you could let go/drop it, so if someone grabbed the shield and tried to pull you off balance you could simply let go, unlike larger shields. As well because it was small/light it was much quicker to react and block sword strikes and other melee weapons.

 

More detailed info/sources:

http://www.thearma.o...dandBuckler.htm

 

The disadvantages of it are also in it's size though. Because it's so small it wasn't great at protecting you from range and left parts exposed to arrows and such. However in terms of melee combat, the buckler was by far the best shield for one on one melee fighting. It lasted even after shields started to fall out of place into the later Renaissance (IE swashbucklers).

 

 

Larger shields on the other hand offered better range protection. Covering more parts of the body. It was also better in terms of formation fighting (See the Romans).

 

I'd love if shields were treated more realistically in PE, where if you wanted to make your character a kind of dex-based fighter who relies on speed you could use a sword+buckler combination and have many offensive moves with it whereas another character could go more str based with a larger shield and be more defensive focused.

 

If shields had more details on them. For example smaller shields had a higher chance to block blows (because they are lighter/quicker you can move them faster) but less of a chance to block range attacks. Whereas larger shields offered slightly less reaction time ibut better range protection. Just something more realistic and not "bigger = better."

Edited September 28, 2012 by Stiler

[ogrezilla]

that would be cool. Maybe even allow some shields to be used by fighters as a sort of off hand weapon like you said. Not as good as actually attacking with a sword, but a little extra damage. I like the general idea of more item type differentiation.

Edited September 28, 2012 by ogrezilla

[zimcub]

You need to remember that you aren't just fighting humanoids in the game.

When an ogre slams that mace on your head you would rather use a large shield to absorb the damage than a buckler, not to mention something bigger like a dragon.

And because of issues like that you probably need to list, for the player, all the shields and all the creatures that would get different type of protection, which can become very confusing.

That's why it's much easier to just say bigger shield = better

 

Or you could just give the bigger ones some kind of penalty like to hit or dexterity if you want to make smaller shields more important.

[Karranthain]

Some thoughts on shield mechanics : http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60205-weapon-mechanics/page__st__40#entry1203272

[Living One]

Overall I'd agree to give shields(and other equipment) various advanages and disadvantages based on type though it's more because it makes for intresting gameplay choices rather than realism.

Edited September 28, 2012 by Living One

[TrashMan]

However in terms of melee combat, the buckler was by far the best shield for one on one melee fighting.

 

 

HAHAHAHAHHA.......nope

[draft1983]

I would like to talk about shields.

 

Throughout history shields have been an important part of combat, there are many types of shields from your small bucklers to the larger tower shields and so on.Shields had many differences amongst them and ways in which they were used for various combats. Shields did not have to be big, and bigger shields did not mean the shield was better.

 

In most rpg games that is how it is though. The bigger the shield, the better it is. You usually get small bucklers early on that are crappy, and later on get into tower shields and the like that are treated as better shields. This is just not how shields actually are. Each shield type had both advantages and disadvantages.

 

Bucklers for example, are very small and light shields. They were used for the longest time throughout history, longer then any other shield type. Bucklers were held in your hand (Rather then being strapped to your arm like larger shields) and with the lightness/speed of it was also a very offensive weapon as well as defense. The bucklers could be varied, from having a spike on the front, sharp edges around it (that could cut) to having a latch that could catch weapons and things. Also because it was simply held in your hand, you could let go/drop it, so if someone grabbed the shield and tried to pull you off balance you could simply let go, unlike larger shields. As well because it was small/light it was much quicker to react and block sword strikes and other melee weapons.

 

More detailed info/sources:

http://www.thearma.o...dandBuckler.htm

 

The disadvantages of it are also in it's size though. Because it's so small it wasn't great at protecting you from range and left parts exposed to arrows and such. However in terms of melee combat, the buckler was by far the best shield for one on one melee fighting. It lasted even after shields started to fall out of place into the later Renaissance (IE swashbucklers).

 

 

Larger shields on the other hand offered better range protection. Covering more parts of the body. It was also better in terms of formation fighting (See the Romans).

 

I'd love if shields were treated more realistically in PE, where if you wanted to make your character a kind of dex-based fighter who relies on speed you could use a sword+buckler combination and have many offensive moves with it whereas another character could go more str based with a larger shield and be more defensive focused.

 

If shields had more details on them. For example smaller shields had a higher chance to block blows (because they are lighter/quicker you can move them faster) but less of a chance to block range attacks. Whereas larger shields offered slightly less reaction time ibut better range protection. Just something more realistic and not "bigger = better."

 

Better against spears??? halberds?? long axes?? even estocs are probably effective not only vs plate but bucklers too... bastard swords?? too many weapons to type that are effective against a buckler....

[draft1983]

skipping through that wall of text seems it was highly effective in fencing and with other light weapons such as rapiers. personally wouldnt want one vs guys with plate mail and heavy weapons, i would have that whole arm taken off if i tried to block

[Stiler]

However in terms of melee combat, the buckler was by far the best shield for one on one melee fighting.

 

 

HAHAHAHAHHA.......nope

 

Do you post anything constructive on these forums? Why do you think not?

 

Better against spears??? halberds?? long axes?? even estocs are probably effective not only vs plate but bucklers too... bastard swords?? too many weapons to type that are effective against a buckler....

 

 

I'd encourage you to read the link I posted. Bucklers were actually one of the best counters to pole weapons on the battlefields, and I quote:

 

"The infamous Machiavelli himself in his own 1521 Arte of Warre, wrote of how at the battle of Barletta in 1503 the Spanish sword and buckler men dealt with the Swiss pikemen: “When they came to engage, the Swiss pressed so hard on their enemy with their pikes, that they soon opened their ranks; but the Spaniards, under the cover of their bucklers, nimbly rushed in upon them with their swords, and laid about them so furiously, that they made a very great slaughter of the Swiss, and gained a complete victory.”

 

As far as having your arm broke, not if you block it no. A bigger shield would also affect your vision which was another advantage smaller shields like bucklers had.

 

As far people in plate, actually bucklers were used by many knights, in full plate. Because of it's quickness/light weight.

 

Another quote from that link I gave:

"In the Middle Ages, bucklers were common armaments among both knights and common soldiers – even more so than shields."

[Shardbearer]

The Edair artwork seems to have a very reasonably sized shield...

[draft1983]

yes according to that link, but i have dedicated my time to reading others and they all suggest that they were widley used by pirates and other swashbuckler types, hence why called swashbucklers. good vs others with light swords and thin armor, but not vs armor clad warriors, and yes i ahve read various documents on the subject matter.

[ogrezilla]

The Edair artwork seems to have a very reasonably sized shield...

But it isn't better than a buckler in all situations even though in most games it would be.

 

The biggest advantage of a larger shield outside of obviously being a bigger target is that you are able to brace it against your body to take a bigger blow. A buckler can't really do that since its small and in your hand. A buckler is better at deflecting attacks whereas a larger shield is more capable of absorbing an attack because you can get your whole arm and shoulder behind the block more easily. A buckler would do very little against a big ogre with a hammer because the arm alone isn't going to be strong enough to absorb a hit. Basically, a buckler seems like it would be better for a more aggressive fighter who wants to deflect an attack and counter where a larger shield is better for simply defending yourself from heavier attacks.

Edited September 28, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Stiler]

yes according to that link, but i have dedicated my time to reading others and they all suggest that they were widley used by pirates and other swashbuckler types, hence why called swashbucklers. good vs others with light swords and thin armor, but not vs armor clad warriors, and yes i ahve read various documents on the subject matter.

 

 

The buckler was still in use during that time period, when other shields had fallen out of favor because of guns, etc. That shows you how versatile it was. It doesn't mean it was only used then, it was used LONG before that time period and I do not know owhy you think it's only effective vs thin armor opponents? It's a shield, you still use a weapon...

 

AS a shield goes, the buckler was far more versatile to use in melee combat then other shields, hence why many knights, in full plate armor, fighting against other knights, in full plate armor, used them.

[rjshae]

skipping through that wall of text seems it was highly effective in fencing and with other light weapons such as rapiers. personally wouldnt want one vs guys with plate mail and heavy weapons, i would have that whole arm taken off if i tried to block

 

Yes, you'd need some type of rock-paper-scissors scheme involving the game's weapons and shields. Maybe split weapons into slow/heavy and light/fast categories, then small or large shields have different defenses against each type.

[Giantevilhead]

I think you have to take the fantasy elements into consideration.

 

Sure, it's difficult for a normal human to lug around a large shield but what about someone with 5 times the strength of a normal human or shields that are made of some kind of super light magical alloy?

[draft1983]

 

 

a vidoe of two epopel fighting with the buckler/rapier and a spear

Edited September 28, 2012 by draft1983

[draft1983]

yes according to that link, but i have dedicated my time to reading others and they all suggest that they were widley used by pirates and other swashbuckler types, hence why called swashbucklers. good vs others with light swords and thin armor, but not vs armor clad warriors, and yes i ahve read various documents on the subject matter.

 

 

The buckler was still in use during that time period, when other shields had fallen out of favor because of guns, etc. That shows you how versatile it was. It doesn't mean it was only used then, it was used LONG before that time period and I do not know owhy you think it's only effective vs thin armor opponents? It's a shield, you still use a weapon...

 

AS a shield goes, the buckler was far more versatile to use in melee combat then other shields, hence why many knights, in full plate armor, fighting against other knights, in full plate armor, used them.

because it was used in general use with rapiers... and short swords..

[Stiler]

because it was used in general use with rapiers... and short swords..

 

Where are you getting your information? sources/links?

 

A buckler could be used with many different one-handed weapons, it wasn't restricted to short-swords or rapiers like you seem to think.

 

On page 2 of that link I posted it specifically goes into the details about how knights used it and gives proof of this, many artworks from that actual time period showing it being used by full armored knights and others in battles, training, etc.

 

"another similar painting depicting Charles of Blois being taken prisoner in 1347 (BNF FR 2643) portrays one of his knightly captors wearing at his left thigh a small colored buckler hanging upon his longsword. Over all, bucklers outnumber larger arm-worn shields by a ratio of roughly 5 to 1 in such 14th and 15th century artwork."

 

As far as that video goes, it's two guys sparring in modern times. The guy using the buckler/sword isn't trying to get in close (where the spear guy is the weakest). It would take a dodge/block of his thrust (or grabbing his spear if he misses) and then rushing in close and the spear guy is useless with that spear.

 

in the video the guy keeps at range (where the spear is the strongest) and never even tries this.

[draft1983]

because it was used in general use with rapiers... and short swords..

 

Where are you getting your information? sources/links?

 

A buckler could be used with many different one-handed weapons, it wasn't restricted to short-swords or rapiers like you seem to think.

 

On page 2 of that link I posted it specifically goes into the details about how knights used it and gives proof of this, many artworks from that actual time period showing it being used by full armored knights and others in battles, training, etc.

 

"another similar painting depicting Charles of Blois being taken prisoner in 1347 (BNF FR 2643) portrays one of his knightly captors wearing at his left thigh a small colored buckler hanging upon his longsword. Over all, bucklers outnumber larger arm-worn shields by a ratio of roughly 5 to 1 in such 14th and 15th century artwork."

 

As far as that video goes, it's two guys sparring in modern times. The guy using the buckler/sword isn't trying to get in close (where the spear guy is the weakest). It would take a dodge/block of his thrust (or grabbing his spear if he misses) and then rushing in close and the spear guy is useless with that spear.

 

in the video the guy keeps at range (where the spear is the strongest) and never even tries this.

 

because it isn't easy to get in close when someone has a spear??? range advantage? the times he tries he gets a spear int he face. if you look on the web there is lots of sources that show what i am saying, but some people minds can not be changed form an opinion and dismiss even video evidence. so i tire of this *yawn*

[draft1983]

because it was used in general use with rapiers... and short swords..

 

Where are you getting your information? sources/links?

 

A buckler could be used with many different one-handed weapons, it wasn't restricted to short-swords or rapiers like you seem to think.

 

On page 2 of that link I posted it specifically goes into the details about how knights used it and gives proof of this, many artworks from that actual time period showing it being used by full armored knights and others in battles, training, etc.

 

"another similar painting depicting Charles of Blois being taken prisoner in 1347 (BNF FR 2643) portrays one of his knightly captors wearing at his left thigh a small colored buckler hanging upon his longsword. Over all, bucklers outnumber larger arm-worn shields by a ratio of roughly 5 to 1 in such 14th and 15th century artwork."

 

As far as that video goes, it's two guys sparring in modern times. The guy using the buckler/sword isn't trying to get in close (where the spear guy is the weakest). It would take a dodge/block of his thrust (or grabbing his spear if he misses) and then rushing in close and the spear guy is useless with that spear.

 

in the video the guy keeps at range (where the spear is the strongest) and never even tries this.

 

if u actually read the comments on the vidoe you will see, both of the fighters are trainers at the club and one respondes to many questions about spears vs rapier/buckler.

[draft1983]

LOL, actually i see you ahve already started on that video as well, and using the same information.. gwaaa ha haaaa

[Stiler]

because it was used in general use with rapiers... and short swords..

 

Where are you getting your information? sources/links?

 

A buckler could be used with many different one-handed weapons, it wasn't restricted to short-swords or rapiers like you seem to think.

 

On page 2 of that link I posted it specifically goes into the details about how knights used it and gives proof of this, many artworks from that actual time period showing it being used by full armored knights and others in battles, training, etc.

 

"another similar painting depicting Charles of Blois being taken prisoner in 1347 (BNF FR 2643) portrays one of his knightly captors wearing at his left thigh a small colored buckler hanging upon his longsword. Over all, bucklers outnumber larger arm-worn shields by a ratio of roughly 5 to 1 in such 14th and 15th century artwork."

 

As far as that video goes, it's two guys sparring in modern times. The guy using the buckler/sword isn't trying to get in close (where the spear guy is the weakest). It would take a dodge/block of his thrust (or grabbing his spear if he misses) and then rushing in close and the spear guy is useless with that spear.

 

in the video the guy keeps at range (where the spear is the strongest) and never even tries this.

 

because it isn't easy to get in close when someone has a spear??? range advantage? the times he tries he gets a spear int he face. if you look on the web there is lots of sources that show what i am saying, but some people minds can not be changed form an opinion and dismiss even video evidence. so i tire of this *yawn*

 

 

What are thees sources you speak of?

 

I am giving you sources that actually date FROM that time period, artwork, letters, manuscripts that actually depict people in that real time period.

 

You have only shown me a video in modern times with two people sparring and not real fighting.

 

The spear has the range advantage, the buckler/sword has close quarters advantage. It comes down more to skill then what that video shows. If he blocks the spear thrust, dodges it, or grabs the spear, he can close in and kill him. Meanwhile if the spear guy fakes him out stabs he can win. It's not a "the spear will win or the sword will win" it's about who has the better skill here.

 

Also it would depend on armor too, a spear vs a guy with a sword/buckler wearing full plate armor, the spear would likely not penetrate the armor even if he does hit him unless he hits him in the visor of his helmet.

 

I'm not say you're wrong, or I'm right when it comes to "who'd win, spear vs sword?" I am merely saying it's too much of a skill toss up and neither of us can say for sure the sword would win or the spear, sorry if I confused you.

 

This is starting to get a bit more toward polearms/vs swords and I'd rather keep it on topic of bucklers/shields if you please.

[Sylvius the Mad]

You need to remember that you aren't just fighting humanoids in the game.

When an ogre slams that mace on your head you would rather use a large shield to absorb the damage than a buckler, not to mention something bigger like a dragon.

But a buckler isn't supposed to absorb the damage. A buckler deflects the blow, and because it's so small and light it's possible for the user to move it very precisely to achieve that end. Against the Ogre with the mace, that should still work (though I could also imagine a strength requirements to deflect blows beyond a certain level of force). And for things like dragon attacks, I'd suggest making those sorts of attacks un-deflectable, so a buckler would be worthless. But if your dex-based character is getting stepped on by a dragon, you have bigger problems than equipment selection.

[ogrezilla]

You need to remember that you aren't just fighting humanoids in the game.

When an ogre slams that mace on your head you would rather use a large shield to absorb the damage than a buckler, not to mention something bigger like a dragon.

But a buckler isn't supposed to absorb the damage. A buckler deflects the blow, and because it's so small and light it's possible for the user to move it very precisely to achieve that end. Against the Ogre with the mace, that should still work (though I could also imagine a strength requirements to deflect blows beyond a certain level of force). And for things like dragon attacks, I'd suggest making those sorts of attacks un-deflectable, so a buckler would be worthless. But if your dex-based character is getting stepped on by a dragon, you have bigger problems than equipment selection.

 

some sort of differentiation between deflecting an attack and blocking/absorbing an attack could be a good way to implement the difference between shield types. And attack types for that matter.

 

Worth the resources to implement? I don't know. But interesting to think about.

Edited September 28, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Kissamies]

One way to handle this would be would be having a shield skill or feats/perks and make them count more for smaller shields than larger. Unskilled user would then want to use a large shield, but a really skilled user might be better with a buckler. Also, really large shields should hinder their user.

 

Also, might be nice to take user size in consideration. A medium shield might be large for a dwarf.