Fine Shields
 

I tried every which way to search the TFT forums but got 0 results for this. If I missed it somewhere, please direct to existing discussion.

It appears that Master Armorers can make Fine Plate only. What about Fine Shields? Perhaps they weigh less; perhaps they subtract one more point of damage; perhaps both? What about silver shields?

One of my players asked about this and I can find no mention anywhere - nor any discussion of the idea. Thoughts?

This is not about a House Rule - I can do that easily enough - I'm asking if there has been a consideration of this for addition to the existing Rules.

Re: Fine Shields
 

I'd say no to fine shields. If you make them lighter, they'd just break sooner. They don't seem like the kind of thing that needs to be tailor-made to be easier to hold (lower DX penalty) or that could be configured to deflect more damage without adding more weight, and thus effectively becoming the next-larger larger shield.

Re: Fine Shields
 

Great question! Never crossed my mind. I tried looking up an answer and I think you are correct. The rules imply through omission that no other armor except plate can be improved by armorer skills.
I guess on Cidri that chainmail and shields must be enchanted to improve as they are already at peak design for performance.
It does seem logical that unlike bulky generic plate your typical leather vambrace or quilted smock could not improve greatly no matter how well fitted it becomes. I do however like the idea of the master craftsman making "just the right" changes or quality that my heroes can get a +1 hit or DX out of their coveted chainmail or shield.

Re: Fine Shields
 

As Shostak mentioned, no, there are no fine shields in TFT as written - the hits stopped are based on size, so at most a fine shield would weigh less or be more durable (if using that optional rule about damage to shields).

Stacking armor effects can get very effective, so even adding "just another hit stopped" with a new rule can make the existing options even more stackable, so one might want to be cautious about adding a fine shield option.

Re: Fine Shields
 

You can already stop 15 hits for -1 DX with +5 expert small shield and +5 water armor, so how much more do you need?

Re: Fine Shields
 

What is water armor?

Re: Fine Shields
 

ITL 98: it is called “water armor.”

Re: Fine Shields
 

The "fluff" written about "water armor," makes it highly unlikely to be anything other than a MacGuffin

Re: Fine Shields
 

Yes. (Though I get the feeling that makes it even more likely that Henry will post about it in threads about much more basic questions.)

Re: Fine Shields
 

If you played with durability rules, they could be more durable I guess.

Also, as in Hexagram #4 article Not by Iron Alone you could say that only a master armorer could make something out of the rarer materials.

Re: Fine Shields
 

I would also say there is not a slot for Fine Shields. If I recall correctly, Steve himself wrote that what makes the Fine Platemail is the fitting of the armor to the owner. There is no half-plate, chain-mail or leather. I wonder though, if a Master Tailor couldn't make a Fine Cloth Armor as it could be 'tailored' to the wearer'?

Jimmy beat me to the punch in referencing "Not By Iron Alone" HEXAGRAM #4.

There may be racial armors made by master armorers that can give bonuses, though.

I houseruled that certain dwarven Master Armorers could make Dwarven Chainmail which stops 1 more point; Elven Silversilk (cloth) made by elven Armorer/Tailor which stops 1 more point.
Goblin armor has been mentioned in these lists or elsewhere.

Re: Fine Shields
 

My house rules permit fine partial plate, fine chainmail (though limited to +1 damage protection and no reduction in DX penalty) as well as 'full mail' that is intended to fill the role of the high-medieval armors composed of multiple layers of overlapping mail (-4/-4). So, fine full mail would be -5/-4. It's pretty good, but it should be.

Re: Fine Shields
 

Would you allow for well-balanced large shields?

Re: Fine Shields
 

Have Tony Stark make it. :?

Re: Fine Shields
 

A "balanced" large shield that was -0 DX would be the kind of change that shifts the game balance, since presumably it would cost well under $1000, it would create a situation where people who don't use a balanced shield are really sub-optimal, and so on.

Every time you add something that most well-supplied people can get pretty easily, that gives you any kind of stat adjustment like that, you rearrange the balance of the game. It's possible to do that deliberately and intentionally, but if it's just "here's another thing that gives a +1" without considering game balance, it will tend to make things go a bit lopsided.

Re: Fine Shields
 

This thread should be in the House Rules section.

I would say a well balanced fine shield would need to have been made from a very strong yet light substance. Made from Mithril and weighing only half a normal large shield, the Mithril alone would be worth $100,000 silver. Plus it would take a master armorer to make it, so that would add to the cost. Say it is worth at least $120,000. DX -0 and stops 2. Hmm, since it is mithril I might even let it stop 3 damage.

A rare find and not to be found just laying around any old armor shoppe. Most likely it needs to be won by beating its owner in combat.

Re: Fine Shields
 

So fine and very fine shield have the same stats, except that they weigh less and last longer?

Re: Fine Shields
 

I think of shields as too basic an item to come in a fine version, much less a very fine version. Way too complicated I'd say. Love Axyl's Mithril shield though, I'd definitely use that, keeping it at a 6-figure price.

Other than that, only enchanted shields should convey any bonus (and if stacking enchantment on top of Mithril, make it a 8-figure price - just one such shield in a campaign world would be a game changer).

Re: Fine Shields
 

Douglas Cole, of Gaming Ballistic fame, has done a lot of thinking about shields--well, Viking shields, anyway. His blogposts about shields are worth a read, though some of it will make more sense if you speak GURPS.

Some of what Douglas talks about makes me think that it aligns pretty well with Joe Tippets's idea of shields giving DX penalty to incoming attacks. It also makes me think that the Shield talent could perhaps have an advanced version that offers some cool offensive disarming techniques. They'd have to be simple enough to fit TFT's flavor, though.

Re: Fine Shields
 

Kinda fun to re-read that old article and see what I said then, and what I might say now with four or five years behind me.

Having a shield give a DX penalty to attacks is almost certainly the game design technique that has the most verisimilitude. Denying lines of attack is what they do on the defensive. Using the more mobile shield set of these buckler-gripped shields (and many strapped shields as well) as a wall against which the enemy shall beat upon is a terrible, terrible plan for many reasons.

Some shields, though, perhaps the Roman scutum and the Greek aspis, were much, much heavier and thickerr, usually with that weight supported by a strap (called a guige, I believe). These DID provide cover (a DX penalty), were much less mobile (but not immobile), but also were capable of absorbing significant punishment. They could and did weigh 15 to 30 lbs.

The more mobile shields (my most recent shields are 34 or 34.5 inches in diameter and weigh 6 lbs) are also use remarkably offensively, both to keep foes at bay as well as to manipulate their defenses by what can only be considered grappling with them. Pushing the edge and face of the shield against the foe and their shield to open lines, trap weapons, and even occasionally provide a nice bash to the face. Recently I used my shield edge to, um, vigorously pin a partner's wrist to the ground when he thought that reaching under my shield and "fishing" for a blade-to-body contact was a good idea. I then discarded my own blade, relieved him of his, and delivered a (non-contact) mordhau to his head. Fun times.

Ultimately, what the TFT rules with shields providing armor have going for them is simplicity and speed. They don't interfere with game play, they don't add die rolls, and they do mitigate attacks. Boom, there you go. There's really no interaction between the shield and the attacker until after the attacker has done their thing.

This isn't the case with a DX penalty, even. That's super simple (shields might provide -1, -2, and -3 to DX, for example, at small, medium, and large), but still means you have to interrogate the target before rolling your dice. That's not quite as much friction as a counter-roll (roll for shield effectiveness, like GURPS' defense roll), but it's still more than "stops 2 hits."

Escalating further, like shield expertise providing even higher DX penalties if the user can make some sort of skill roll on their turn, is even more friction.

That "friction" can also be described as "complexity" or "tactical depth" depending on how generous or critical you're feeling. But I'll end with this:

1. The existing system works. It's been tested as balanced via years of play.
2. It is absolutely plausible that alternates - like the DX penalty - provide an acceptable balance of increased verisimilitude versus increased friction/complexity

3. In my own experience, shield use is a LOT more complicated and nuanced than most games give it credit for. That doesn't mean that rules must be adjusted, but it does mean that we may be missing out on some fun options.

Re: Fine Shields
 

The Roman scutum has a center grip rather than a strap.

This is why it has to be curved. You can't hold such a long shield at arm's length in the enemy's face for any amount of time so you need it to curve around the body as you hold it close.

But of course this won't work at all on horseback, hence the strapped Norman flat shield.

Re: Fine Shields
 

I've seen them with and without straps; it's possible that the strap is simply for carrying it around, but some of the strap arrangements make it look very much like a guige - designed to help support the weight of the shield with the back and shoulders.

It is possible that that arrangement is ahistorical; I'm looking for sources.

The grip is also horizontal, which is interesting.

The aspis is the classic giant, heavy Greek shield...and huh. That one seems to more or less strap to the forearm just below the elbow, is deeply domed (you can rest the upper lip on the shoulder), and what I thought was a shield strap was actually a sword baldric hanger.

Re: Fine Shields
 

A visual comparison of center grip vs strapped is on the front cover of ITL