Skip to content

Minsc = no AC benefit from shield??

I'm certainly not an expert on the mechanics and fine points of this game, so maybe there is something simple that I'm just not seeing.......but when I put a large shield +1 on a character that is wearing, say, only full plate armor....it benefits their AC. But when I put that shield on Minsc, for some reason there is no change to his AC. He's not wearing any ring or amulet that would already boost his AC either. He can equip the shield, but just gets no AC benefit. Is there a reason for this?

Comments

  • jmerryjmerry Member Posts: 2,870
    Is he using a two-handed weapon, such as a two-handed sword or a bow? While you can put a shield in the off hand at any time in the EEs, you can only actually use it if your main-hand weapon is one-handed. Try switching to a mace - Minsc can use a mace and shield if you want that extra AC. More damage and longer range with the big sword, more defense with the mace and shield - that's the tradeoff.
  • newguynewguy Member Posts: 6
    edited September 22
    Well, shoot, nevermind....just figured it out. (He had a 2H sword equipped.) I just need to figure out how to delete this post now, lol.

    Jmerry, thanks! I figured it out just before I saw your response.
  • jmerryjmerry Member Posts: 2,870
    Don't worry too much. So you asked a question that had a really simple answer. I've done that too; we all have. Sometimes the very act of formulating the question jogs the answer loose, and sometimes you need someone else to point out what should be "obvious". There's no harm in leaving this up; it'll just fade into obscurity as new things get posted anyway.
  • SamAshenSamAshen Member Posts: 68
    jmerry wrote: »
    Don't worry too much. So you asked a question that had a really simple answer. I've done that too; we all have. Sometimes the very act of formulating the question jogs the answer loose, and sometimes you need someone else to point out what should be "obvious". There's no harm in leaving this up; it'll just fade into obscurity as new things get posted anyway.

    I just saw this answer and it is perfect! I never figured out how to mark posts with reactions, or I would do that.

    This is related to something I noticed with EE - that I can equip shields and offhand weapons on my character and then equip a 2 hand weapon. It is convenient on two levels. It saves the inventory slot and the configuration can be changed very quickly with the quick weapons.

    In old-school BG, we had to change from 2H bow to sword and board in the inventory and that meant the game clock was ticking and that was usually very bad. That was another reason I favored 1H missiles on tank characters, because they would have the shield.
  • StummvonBordwehrStummvonBordwehr Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 1,149
    jmerry wrote: »
    Don't worry too much. So you asked a question that had a really simple answer. I've done that too; we all have. Sometimes the very act of formulating the question jogs the answer loose, and sometimes you need someone else to point out what should be "obvious". There's no harm in leaving this up; it'll just fade into obscurity as new things get posted anyway.

    I - and most others - will fully agree. We have all done the same some time.
Sign In or Register to comment.