In almost every single game that features shields, from RPG's to action games, it has generally always been, bigger = better.

For anyone who knows about shields, historically and otherwise, they know that shields are one of the main things that are simply treated incorrectly in almost anything they are used in, from games to movies, etc.

When it comes to history there is a reason that the buckler, which was one of the smallest shield types, was used longer then any other shield in many many different battle situations. It was simply one of the best and most versatile shield types throughout history.

Shields all had their weaknesses and were better used vs certain situations. The bigger shields would be better suited for defending vs archery or formation based defense, but they were bigger and heavier, not as quick/agile as a buckler.

The advantages of using a buckler in terms of melee fighting:

1. Quick and agile, able to quickly block strikes
2. Held in hand instead of strapped to arm. Thus people couldn't grab your shield and pull you down/throw you off balance.
3. The shield could be used offensively as well. Bucklers could be made to have sharp edges, this could be used to cut someone. Also handy for an off hand punch to throw someone off balance.
4. Defense modifications. There was the famous "sword breaker," basically a spike that was put in the middle of the buckler which over time could harm/damage the enemies eapons. There was also the sword catcher, basically a "latch" type of thing that could catch someones sword (if you blocked it right) and then you could pull it/disarm them.

The main disadvantage to the buckler was against missile attacks. The area it blocked was small and suited toward blocking melee attacks, not ranged.


I would like to someday at least see a game that treats sheilds more realistically. Gives ALL types advantages/disadvantages and doesn't simply make them bigger = better and treat buckelrs as the "crappy starting shield."

In Ultima Underworld II, bucklers were a handy shield because they provided good defense and didn't weigh that much.

Most games also ignore the fact that historically, shields decreased in size as armor improved. By the time you get full plate armor, the armor was so good that the shields were discarded entirely in favor of larger weapons.

weight, movement issue's and YOU cant use a large shield on a horse.

Pretty much all fantasy games ignore that kind of logic. It's bigger, so it must be better, right? Case in point, anyone here that plays WoW remember this absurdly huge shield(which, I might add, was one of the best of that expansion)? http://static.wowhead.com/uploads/screenshots/normal/164239.jpg

Just looking at that picture reminded me of how stupid WoW is...

Hmmm... Well one way to implement that would be to have different types of damage and DR (as in Fallout), e.g. Melee DR and Ranged DR, that would make the kind of realism you're looking for quite possible

Men often tend to crave for something bigger and better. Often, they get these two things mixed up and begin to think that bigger means better. I mean look at these people going "Grrr" on the traffic with their pick-up trucks with bad gas mileage. They pay twice more than smarter people with smaller cars, but they're happy!
Anyways, I don't think shields will be that much mis-presented in TES. As far as I remember, all shields were about same size in Oblivion.

Exactly what I was thinking.

Either that, or a block chance depending on what shield you're using. With bucklers, you have a higher chance to block melee attacks. With a larger shield, you're more likely to block arrows and probably spears (though I don't see them being in game). Your block skill could also factor into all this.

Edit: I reread this and should probably clarify that I'm not talking about a system like Morrowind, where you're character blocks for you. I just mean that there's a chance that when you block an attack, depending on the factors above, it may not absorb the damage from the attack.

a good way to model the downsides for large shields would be to give large bulky ones significant agility, speed, etc. penalites that would reflect how cumbersome such items are. They would give excellent defense against swords and blunt weapons, but you'd be quite limited in your offensive weapon options while using one.

I'd like to see a document or quotation backing up your assertion about bucklers being the "longest used shield in history."

The most famous shields I can think of were the Greek hoplon (or aspis) and the Roman scutum. Both were large, heavy, wooden shields, rimmed if not faced with metal. They were used in formation, so the negatives to movement were not so much. The scutum was large enough to be set on the ground, and much of the weight was actually carried by the shoulder and back, not just the arm, so it could also be used to shield bash, and even if it's slower, it packs more punch and hits a wider area.

Viking shields were also fairly large, maybe a bit smaller than the aspis, and the Saxon "tear" or "rain drop" shields were even larger.

I'm not saying that small shields should not have "advantages," over a large shield, and that they should always be inferior just because smaller = less coverage, less strength. But to say that the buckler was hands-down, the best shield ever, is just as bad as any mistake that games or movies may have made concerning shields.

Either that, or since they'll probably use manual blocking like in Oblivion, they could just have it that smaller shields block quicker than large ones. That way smaller shields would be more suited for the reflex actions of melee battle (although meaning you'd need to close in quickly to avoid becoming a pincushion), while with large ones you could approach more slowly, weathering their ranged attacks so they're tired out by the time you reach them, helping avoid a lengthy melee.

Lots of good info with quotes and references from historical fighting manuals, etc.

http://www.thearma.org/essays/SwordandBuckler.htm

Also don't confuse "Best shield ever" with what I said. I was merely pointing out that many different types of shield have both their advantages and disadvantages and aren't simply "bigger = better" like most people see them.

in terms of melee combat, the buckler was the most versatile shield to use compared to any other and would be better suited to it then a larger heavier shield.

What about the Kite Shield was it stronger but less agile than the buckler? I always like the buckler but liked the kite shield even more. and the turtle shield i forgot the roman name.

There's a lot of variables to consider, really, when it comes to shields. What size shield are you using? What kind of armor are you wearing? What kind of weapon are you up against? As I said previously, historically as armors have improved, shield size got smaller. Full plate armor was so good the shield wasn't needed at all, so they got rid of it to use heavier weapons. You probably wouldn't want to face one of those with a small buckler. On the other hand, it'd be perfect for civilian dueling where they used lighter, faster swords.

It may ultimately be moot, though. In Oblivion, there were no bucklers, or kite shields or tower shields. They were all roughly the same size. It may be the same in Skyrim, for all we know.

I think TES got the size of shields just right. They aren't too big and they aren't too small.

I loved the Tower Shield in Daggerfall. It was HUGE

I like the idea of some variation and would like a more tactical approach to combat in general. Although a buckler would be more agile/quick, I suspect a lot more skill is also required to use it effectively. At low skill levels a large shield, whilst slower to block with, should be more effective than a buckler. The buckler becoming more effective as skill increases until it approaches a larger heavier shield in effectiveness but doesn't surpass it (speed and lightness are it's main advantages). The larger shield should always have an advantage over a buckler versus arrows.

According to the GI Hub: 'Later this month, we'll be digging in to reveal more about the in-game mechanics, combat, and technical features that make Skyrim shine.' so we may find out what has actually been implemented shortly.

Regarding the 'ARMA' site linked above: There's lots of interesting reading there but it's not exactly unbiased. It has a few jabs at fencing and SCA-type groups which are quite amusing to read - no love lost there.

edit. clarity

Excellent website. I love all the historical tapestries, documents actually depicting it. I DO wonder if they've been rendered smaller as an artistic choice, although they are obviously smaller than the typical shield.

One thing is the way they define bucklers. They say it "differs from a shield in that the latter is carried by straps and worn on the arm whereas the former is held in single-hand in a “fist” grip."

You might like this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdHo-1jbX1A especially if you like Monty Python

The guy shows large shields, which he believes were held in the manner of a buckler.

Also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__mH8Xa7Sto&feature=related
and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXiUDJRgiUc