3 added 843 characters in body
source | link

The phrase of not being able to receive benefits of two shields at the same time was referring to normal shields in regards to AC.

One could use two shields and in actual history has been done by soldiers protecting others. One can use two rings one on each hand. One can use two shields one in each hand and receive the magical benefits but not AC is what its telling me.

Also, if using two shields your hands are occupied and perhaps not viewed as a threat or "turtling" so not attacked anyways.

Edit for better explanation per Davids request: You can not benefit from two rings of protection same effect, does not stack, two shield bonuses AC same thing don't stack. Ring protection and ring of fire resistance, both work not stacking same effect. Shield of fire resistance and spell guard shield would both work but AC bonus from only one. Replace shield of fire resistance with shield +3 same thing gets only best AC but also other shield. No historical evidence of two shield users for attacking purposes though there are shields made for that, spikes and bladed ones in the Royal Armoury. Historical evidence of "shield bearers" used only shields defensively to protect their lords/nobles 11th century manuscript in British Library. Also used to protect siege equipment operators, like rams, sappers, archers from other archers.

The phrase of not being able to receive benefits of two shields at the same time was referring to normal shields in regards to AC.

One could use two shields and in actual history has been done by soldiers protecting others. One can use two rings one on each hand. One can use two shields one in each hand and receive the magical benefits but not AC is what its telling me.

Also, if using two shields your hands are occupied and perhaps not viewed as a threat or "turtling" so not attacked anyways.

The phrase of not being able to receive benefits of two shields at the same time was referring to normal shields in regards to AC.

One could use two shields and in actual history has been done by soldiers protecting others. One can use two rings one on each hand. One can use two shields one in each hand and receive the magical benefits but not AC is what its telling me.

Also, if using two shields your hands are occupied and perhaps not viewed as a threat or "turtling" so not attacked anyways.

Edit for better explanation per Davids request: You can not benefit from two rings of protection same effect, does not stack, two shield bonuses AC same thing don't stack. Ring protection and ring of fire resistance, both work not stacking same effect. Shield of fire resistance and spell guard shield would both work but AC bonus from only one. Replace shield of fire resistance with shield +3 same thing gets only best AC but also other shield. No historical evidence of two shield users for attacking purposes though there are shields made for that, spikes and bladed ones in the Royal Armoury. Historical evidence of "shield bearers" used only shields defensively to protect their lords/nobles 11th century manuscript in British Library. Also used to protect siege equipment operators, like rams, sappers, archers from other archers.

2 added 128 characters in body
source | link

The phrase of not being able to receive benefits of two shields at the same time was referring to normal shields in regards to AC.

One could use two shields and in actual history has been done by soldiers protecting others. One can use two rings one on each hand. One can use two shields one in each hand and receive the magical benefits but not AC is what its telling me.

Also, if using two shields your hands are occupied and perhaps not viewed as a threat or "turtling" so not attacked anyways.

The phrase of not being able to receive benefits of two shields at the same time was referring to normal shields in regards to AC.

One could use two shields and in actual history has been done by soldiers protecting others. One can use two rings one on each hand. One can use two shields one in each hand and receive the magical benefits but not AC is what its telling me.

The phrase of not being able to receive benefits of two shields at the same time was referring to normal shields in regards to AC.

One could use two shields and in actual history has been done by soldiers protecting others. One can use two rings one on each hand. One can use two shields one in each hand and receive the magical benefits but not AC is what its telling me.

Also, if using two shields your hands are occupied and perhaps not viewed as a threat or "turtling" so not attacked anyways.

1
source | link

The phrase of not being able to receive benefits of two shields at the same time was referring to normal shields in regards to AC.

One could use two shields and in actual history has been done by soldiers protecting others. One can use two rings one on each hand. One can use two shields one in each hand and receive the magical benefits but not AC is what its telling me.