You are using realism as an excuse to limit the system, whereas the simulationism I'm looking for is meant to improve a mechanic widely regarded as underpowered. Acceptable breaks are what they will be, but nerfing one aspect of an underpowered system just because "that's how it works IRL" isn't good design.
No, I'm not.
I'm using realism to explain why a particular term in the game is silly, which combined with certain other elements in the game explains why certain things work the way they do. (That is, "Why does a tower shield have such restrictions on its use?")
I am using that, and other realistic elements, to suggest methods of improving an underpowered system, which to a large extent is so underpowered precisely because it is NOT realistic.
Not allowing a tower shield in melee combat is one such nerf.
Read what I wrote again:
The "heavy" shield, formerly the "extreme" shield, takes the place of the tower shield in terms of AC, gains the ability to do pushes or punches, does not have an attack penalty, AND does not require a special weapon proficiency, free for some, exotic otherwise.
And that's not including adding in the additional arrow deflection and miss chance concepts.
In what way does that qualify as a nerf?
Is being able to get total cover from weapon attacks only at the cost of being unable to attack really that awesome an ability?
Is it not compensated for by everything else, plus the +4 to AC against arrows?
Realistically speaking, when have you ever seen a player use a tower shield in your campaigns?
To avoid a trap by claiming full cover behind the shield.
And I think a spellcaster used one once to go "turtle" to avoid getting obliterated by an ogre.
There so little support for them that the only thing I've ever seen is theoretical abuse involving using their cover mechanic to make a Hide check, and the using Sleight of Hand to hide the shield itself.
I never saw that one.
Of course if the tower shield is so irrelevant to use, why get so upset about deleting it from the equipment list? If nobody uses them, how can it be missed?
But . . .
What does that have to do with looking at shields, finding them underpowered, wondering why, looking as how shields were really used, and saying "well, tower shields as written really weren't for melee, but large shields should provide much more cover and still be usable as weapons"?