Allow training of Shields with shield in inventory only

[omegonthesane]

You can train weapons without wielding them, you can train Armour and Dodging without having to wear any particular armour, so why can't you train Shields without actually wearing one?

This is particularly pertinent for Ogres and Trolls, who do not have access to bucklers and thus cannot don a shield at all without hideous spellcasting penalties which only go away after significant skill investment. I would go so far as to say this makes shield use a no-brainer decision for ogres - if they're pure damage dealers, they want a GSC, if they're mostly spellcasters, they will be crippled by a shield, unable to get out of that trap without actually wielding the shield and taking the crippling penalty, and thus still want a GSC. I thought no-brainers were bad.

[Tiktacy]

I have seen this suggested before, and I think the main issue is that doing so involves removing an interesting dilemma, and crawl is usually against those. The dilemma is "should I train shields for extra defense while I deal with the spell penalties or should I just not bother because I can't kill much with it?" It delays further progression in offense in exchange for a very powerful defense.

While you would sort of have the same issue with dodging and armor, shields are unique and requires a different level of thinking; while not exactly a lot, it's still something.

Also, shields do not have as much of a penalty for trolls and ogres. Large species require only 9 skill to fully get rid of shield penalty, and 15 for large shields.

[Leafsnail]

"Should I change my equipment just before I kill each monster" isn't an interesting dilemna so much as a tedious distraction, that's why you only need a weapon in your inventory to train weapon skills. I don't see any reason for shields to be treated differently, particularly because this system causes interface annoyance when the only skill you're training is shields.

[Implojin]

But it wouldn't be very realistic to be able to train Shields without having a shield equipped.

(This thread is about filling out tavern bingo cards, right?)

[omegonthesane]

I have seen this suggested before, and I think the main issue is that doing so involves removing an interesting dilemma, and crawl is usually against those. The dilemma is "should I train shields for extra defense while I deal with the spell penalties or should I just not bother because I can't kill much with it?" It delays further progression in offense in exchange for a very powerful defense.

While you would sort of have the same issue with dodging and armor, shields are unique and requires a different level of thinking; while not exactly a lot, it's still something.

This "dilemma" does not exist for any other race, because Bucklers exist for all other races, and have a laughably small skill penalty even at Shields 0. If a Spriggan, or a Kobold, or a Deep Elf, absolutely must learn how to Shields, it can do so with a buckler and not notice the difference in its penalised skills. Not so an Ogre, or a Troll.

Investing in Shields is an interesting dilemma when you can do so without immediate penalty - "Do I spend my off-hand slot on a third layer of defence instead of using a two-handed weapon, and with points I could be spending on other skills?". Making Shields the obviously worse short term option removes this dilemma completely.

Also, shields do not have as much of a penalty for trolls and ogres. Large species require only 9 skill to fully get rid of shield penalty, and 15 for large shields.

9 skill levels is a substantial investment at +5, let alone at -1.

See above re: bucklers.

[Tiktacy]

No it isn't, at +5 it's basically nothing. Also, the only thing in the game that is +5 for any species is stealth. But that's beside the point.

I don't know how to make it easier to understand, making shields act the way weapons do makes them much less unique and arguably even a no brainer. You guys should stop comparing shields to weapons, weapons don't give a penalty to spell success, shields do.

Honestly, the only thing forced shield equipping does is teach good habits, shields are a very useful defense tool and should be utilized if at all possible.

Edit: oh yeah, if you are wearing medium armor, the EV penalty is more noticeable for buckles, still not too bad usually though.

[KittenInMyCerealz]

I don't know how to make it easier to understand, making shields act the way weapons do makes them much less unique and arguably even a no brainer.

I don't see how this would make shields a no brainer. I would never allocate my exp to the shields skill until I've actually found a shield. And the penalty for buckler is so small its barely noticeable, and you get rid of it very, very fast.
The only thing i see this change changing, is what OP mentioned. And i don't view that as a bad thing at all.

[phobetor]

I have seen this suggested before, and I think the main issue is that doing so involves removing an interesting dilemma, and crawl is usually against those. The dilemma is "should I train shields for extra defense while I deal with the spell penalties or should I just not bother because I can't kill much with it?" It delays further progression in offense in exchange for a very powerful defense.

That's true, but if you could train shields with one in your inventory it creates a new dilemma which is equally if not more interesting. "Do I stop training what I'm working on now to get a shield up and running."

The way things are now if you find a shield on say D:5, and you're not a tank, you are not going to use it until A. your core skills are so high the shield's impact is negligible or B. you find a buckler and train with that on. You really don't have a choice.

If you could train with one in your inventory and your lucky enough to find an early shield it may be worthwhile to divert some training to get the shield usable earlier.

Plus you would eliminate the annoying interface hiccup when only training shields, so I'm all for this proposal.

[omegonthesane]

I have seen this suggested before, and I think the main issue is that doing so involves removing an interesting dilemma, and crawl is usually against those. The dilemma is "should I train shields for extra defense while I deal with the spell penalties or should I just not bother because I can't kill much with it?" It delays further progression in offense in exchange for a very powerful defense.

That's true, but if you could train shields with one in your inventory it creates a new dilemma which is equally if not more interesting. "Do I stop training what I'm working on now to get a shield up and running."

If you find a shield on say D:5, and you're not a tank, you are not going to use it until A. your core skills are so high the shield's impact is negligible or B. you find a buckler and train with that on.

If you could train with one in your inventory and your lucky enough to find an early shield it may be worthwhile to divert some training to get the shield usable earlier.

Plus you would eliminate the annoying interface hiccup when only training shields, so I'm all for this proposal.

With this proposal, ogres would face a dilemma upon finding a shield - "is it worth training up?".

Under the status quo, it is never worth it for ogre spellcasters, because the spell penalties are too high and Giant Spiked Clubs are an unvarnished good. A DE(whatever) with a Quarterstaff, a Dagger, and a Buckler has a dilemma; an OgWz with a GSC, a sacred scourge, and a shield will generally pick the GSC and under no possible circumstance go within thrown object range of the shield.

[Amnesiac]

Is it worth training for a shield anyway, especially early on? No.

[Leafsnail]

I don't know how to make it easier to understand, making shields act the way weapons do makes them much less unique and arguably even a no brainer. You guys should stop comparing shields to weapons, weapons don't give a penalty to spell success, shields do.

How does the fact that shields change spell success change anything? If you want shields skill but right now you'd rather not use one you can switch to a shield just before you kill each monster, just like you can switch to a weapon just before you kill each monster. I also don't think shields would be anything like a no-brainer considering that two-handed weapons exist, but if they were then it wouldn't be the fault of this proposal.

Honestly, the only thing forced shield equipping does is teach good habits, shields are a very useful defense tool and should be utilized if at all possible.

This contradicts the rest of your argument. If equipping a shield when training them is always the right thing to do then all this proposal does is remove an interface annoyance, it doesn't make it a "no-brainer" at all.

[galehar]

you can switch to a shield just before you kill each monster, just like you can switch to a weapon just before you kill each monster.

Except that equipping a shield is 12 times longer than switching to a weapon, so no.

[DracheReborn]

FWIW, the idea was brought up before, and had some support, but obviously not enough to be taken up by a dev:

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=9505&p=130572

[Leafsnail]

you can switch to a shield just before you kill each monster, just like you can switch to a weapon just before you kill each monster.

Except that equipping a shield is 12 times longer than switching to a weapon, so no.

That makes it harder than switching to a different weapon, but the incentive is still there. . Maybe I'll put a lot of distance between myself and a slow monster so I can switch to my shield. Maybe I'll make a dash for the stairs so I can change there in peace. Maybe I'll retreat into my summons to give me cover. And so on - scummy tactics are still bad even if they're awkward to perform.

But more importantly I don't really see what this feature adds other than sometimes encouraging you to make your character worse when performing kills.

[galehar]

And so on - scummy tactics are still bad even if they're awkward to perform.

tactics which are convoluted and bad can't be used to make a strong argument.

But more importantly I don't really see what this feature adds other than sometimes encouraging you to make your character worse when performing kills.

When I changed skill training to replace "victory dancing for first level" by skill restrictions, there was a lot more restrictions. You couldn't train weapons and armour without wielding/wearing. The weapon restriction was removed because it had a really bad gameplay effect. The armour restriction was removed because it was based on EVP so it was impossible to train it in steam dragon armour even if it were desirable.
I'm not very happy with this last change, and I regret to have conceded it instead of improving it. I don't like that you can train armour while being naked. Draconians cannot train it after all. I think training armour should require wearing something with at least base AC 4.
So obviously, I don't think that "you're not required to wield/wear weapons and armour to train" is a good argument. I like how shields work better.

[Lasty]

FWIW, if the ogre/troll is wearing robes, the penalty starts at 2.2 instead of 3, and by the time they have 3 shields skill (which should be trivial), it's down to 1.2 -- about the same as a buckler, which some have already said is acceptably small. By the time you hit 6 shields skill (still not a big investment), it's down to 0.2. So yeah, I don't think this is an absurd burden.

[Tiktacy]

And so on - scummy tactics are still bad even if they're awkward to perform.

tactics which are convoluted and bad can't be used to make a strong argument.

But more importantly I don't really see what this feature adds other than sometimes encouraging you to make your character worse when performing kills.

When I changed skill training to replace "victory dancing for first level" by skill restrictions, there was a lot more restrictions. You couldn't train weapons and armour without wielding/wearing. The weapon restriction was removed because it had a really bad gameplay effect. The armour restriction was removed because it was based on EVP so it was impossible to train it in steam dragon armour even if it were desirable.
I'm not very happy with this last change, and I regret to have conceded it instead of improving it. I don't like that you can train armour while being naked. Draconians cannot train it after all. I think training armour should require wearing something with at least base AC 4.
So obviously, I don't think that "you're not required to wield/wear weapons and armour to train" is a good argument. I like how shields work better.

Thank you galahar, you took the word right out of my mouth.

[archaeo]

When I changed skill training to replace "victory dancing for first level" by skill restrictions, there was a lot more restrictions. You couldn't train weapons and armour without wielding/wearing. The weapon restriction was removed because it had a really bad gameplay effect. The armour restriction was removed because it was based on EVP so it was impossible to train it in steam dragon armour even if it were desirable.
I'm not very happy with this last change, and I regret to have conceded it instead of improving it. I don't like that you can train armour while being naked. Draconians cannot train it after all. I think training armour should require wearing something with at least base AC 4.
So obviously, I don't think that "you're not required to wield/wear weapons and armour to train" is a good argument. I like how shields work better.

I can understand the reasoning behind this, but I'll admit to being confused by the special cases here more than once. Maybe this merits inclusion in the game's ?/ menu for skills? "This skill may only be trained when a shield is equipped" or "This skill may only be trained with at least one memorized Poison spell."

[Leafsnail]

Why does the fact that switching is a bit more awkward than with weapons (you have to, say, summon an imp and swap places wirh it before doing so) make it an invalid point? If anything it makes it even more annoying.

And I still don't see what is gained from this. The removal of victory dancng is my single favourite change made since I started playing and I thank you for it, but I don't see what the purpose of this restriction is at all. Even if I accept that switching towards a shield towards the end of a fight is impossible I don't really see "switch to a shield and re-activate the skill when you're fighting popcorn" as that interesting a tactic to encourage.

Incidentally I think it makes sense to leave armour skill allowed all the time for regular species,it provides benefits to anyone who is wearing any AC granting equipment and there's almost no reason to ever be naked.

[TeshiAlair]

Idea- whatever is in your offhand can be trained (aka can be switched using....I think it is semicolon or apostrophe, that's one I just have on muscle memory at this point.) Also allow shields to be special cased as offhand weapons. Then, making swapping to a non-offhand shield or weapon much slower.

1. It has the "realism" thing that the Tavern (and myself on occasion) like.
2. It has a non-scummy way to train weapon types not wielded as primary.
3. It addresses this shield issue.

[and into]

2. It has a non-scummy way to train weapon types not wielded as primary.

You can already train any weapon that is in your inventory. You can even train Axes while you wield a cursed spear, for instance, so long as an axe of some type (even a cursed one!) is in your inventory.

So actually the game already does not base what you are able to train off of what you *could* wield or switch in; used to be that way, but then every time you killed a mummy you could suddenly be forced into the skill menu screen because your dagger got cursed, and you were training long blades off of a scimitar you were carrying. This was annoying and thus changed in spite of "realism."

So while I don't really think it is as much of a game play problem as Leafsnail is claiming, it can occasionally be annoying and more to the point I actually think allowing training of shields based on having one in your inventory would be smoother and more intuitive within the skill training system in use in Trunk.

[Galefury]

I don't like the skill restrictions. They are almost always irrelevant when playing well and in my opinion they do only one useful thing: they prevent bad players from training things they shouldn't. In return for this one good effect, people occasionally have to work around the restrictions and have to learn what is required to train a skill. I think the good effect of skill restrictions could be had without the bad ones:

Leave the skill menu looking as it does now (what skills are displayed and what skills are grayed out), but always allow training all skills. Of course you would have to press * to display the hidden skills first. This way, useless stuff is still hidden from sight, but if you really want to train something you can.

galehar: Why do you think training armour should require wearing it? Realism, or gameplay, or something else?

[galehar]

galehar: Why do you think training armour should require wearing it? Realism, or gameplay, or something else?

A bit of realism and consistency with shields . Also, I think it can be interesting that training skills requires actually using the equipment, even if it has some drawbacks. It didn't work with VD, because you could go train your shield skill on a rat after killing a unique. But now that you're actually forced yo use the item, it can work.
And also to prevent bad players from training armour when they shouldn't. I believe you should never train armour in robe or leather, even if all your slots are full. The gain is way too small, which is why armour was marked as useless for draconians, even if in theory they could gain a couple of AC. But maybe I'm wrong.
But yeah, if there is consensus (from the devs, please don't start voting) that restrictions are never interesting and sometimes annoying, your proposal is good. Although, I think all the annoying cases have been addressed now.

[crate]

I almost always get +1 ac from armour skill when I wear leather armour, and often do so in a robe. In fact, for a human armour skill in a robe is better than armour skill in troll leather armour for an ogre (human gets 3 extra aux armour base AC compared to ogre).

I don't often get more than this, and you could say that the +1 AC doesn't matter, but then I would ask why there is a magic number cutoff on your body armour AC which magically allows you to train armour skill.

If you really want to prevent players from making skill training mistakes, here's my suggestion: simply do not allow a player to train both armour and dodging above 5.0 (I only put the cutoff this high because backgrounds start with armour/dodging skill), since that is the most common mistake (training both armour and dodging). Of course, by doing so, you are significantly hurting players who know what they are doing.

[TeshiAlair]

You can already train any weapon that is in your inventory. You can even train Axes while you wield a cursed spear, for instance, so long as an axe of some type (even a cursed one!) is in your inventory.

Right, I don't like this. I don't think needing to wield it is necessarily the answer, but I think the off-hand thing is a fair compromise and allows for potential consistency and logic

[Amnesiac]

common mistake (training both armour and dodging)

What's so bad about that?.. I mean, in most cases, in any dragon armour up to 11 ER you get more defence if you train both to 10, than only one to 13 or whatever

[crate]

Many players do not understand how armour and dodging work and do things like train dodging up to 10 in plate armour. Certainly there are situations where you want to train both! I mentioned this in my post.

Of course, by doing so, you are significantly hurting players who know what they are doing.

But I find that new players much more often make their characters weaker when they train both armour and dodging.

[galehar]

I don't often get more than this, and you could say that the +1 AC doesn't matter, but then I would ask why there is a magic number cutoff on your body armour AC which magically allows you to train armour skill.

Yeah, that's basically the train of thought which led to the removal of armour skill restriction. Sorry, let's stop this digression about armour skill and optimal skill training.
However, even though I agree that the the removal of the armour skill restriction and loosening of the weapon training criteria are good, neither of the respective reasoning apply to shields.

I think the off-hand thing is a fair compromise and allows for potential consistency and logic

The ' command to quickly switch between a and b slot has nothing to do with the off-hand. The off-hand is used to wield 2-handed weapons, wear shields and punch people in the face. The ' command is just an interface convenience and shouldn't have any gameplay effect.

[Amnesiac]

Like I said, why would you even want to train 10+ shields just to use a shield and if you can't even use it without hurting your killing abilities... Why not actually spend that exp on your killing abilities or other defences, while you wait for a buckler if you want to use shields that much. I think this is precisely why we shouldn't let people train shields if they can't even use them well.

[Baldu3]

I remember when I played Ogres for a while the shield situation was a bit grating as a caster. Manageable, but grating. Maybe Ogres and troll could be able to wield bucklers, but only get something silly like 2 block from it, that way they would have the same easy way to start training shields (wield buckler) as others.

[Bart]

Like I said, why would you even want to train 10+ shields just to use a shield and if you can't even use it without hurting your killing abilities... Why not actually spend that exp on your killing abilities or other defences, while you wait for a buckler if you want to use shields that much. I think this is precisely why we shouldn't let people train shields if they can't even use them well.

The reason is simple - you can be unlucky and not get a buckler (although in 0.14 they seem to drop more often than they used to). Untrained shield heavily limits spellcasting until you get at least few levels in shields. This leads to funny situations - "can I kill this kobold on xl 10 or will miscasts kill me before?"

Also, using your reasoning, it seems that training charms to get haste/deflect is wrong, because you do not make any use of Charms until you reach skill lvl 10+.

Some of us like to plan ahead. I'm used to inconvenience of shield training, but I find your arguments invalid.

[Amnesiac]

Like I said, why would you even want to train 10+ shields just to use a shield and if you can't even use it without hurting your killing abilities... Why not actually spend that exp on your killing abilities or other defences, while you wait for a buckler if you want to use shields that much. I think this is precisely why we shouldn't let people train shields if they can't even use them well.

The reason is simple - you can be unlucky and not get a buckler (although in 0.14 they seem to drop more often than they used to). Untrained shield heavily limits spellcasting until you get at least few levels in shields. This leads to funny situations - "can I kill this kobold on xl 10 or will miscasts kill me before?"

Also, using your reasoning, it seems that training charms to get haste/deflect is wrong, because you do not make any use of Charms until you reach skill lvl 10+.

Some of us like to plan ahead. I'm used to inconvenience of shield training, but I find your arguments invalid.

You don't train for haste, when your other skills are low, and when they are high, you can take a buckler from elves. Why do you even compare shields to haste? While haste is the strongest spell buff, even training for a normal shield is usually a waste, especially if you are a spellcaster, unless you are late in the game (and you can find a buckler at least by that time). If you are a tank, you don't even care. Even if you can't find a buckler, why not just train something usefull, like spell schools for buffs or highlevel conjurations or fighting/dodging/armour/weapon skill/stealth/evocations?

[Bart]

Some people train haste when their skills are barely mediocre and the same works for shields. In both cases this might be reasonable. Apparently we have different opinion on shield (especially with ego or even better randart) value on a spellcaster. Several times I happily wore normal shields even on low-mid level spellcasters, although I would deeply appreciate if I didn't have to go through pain of first 5 levels of shield skill training.

Under some RARE circumstances you do not find a buckler even in midgame, but have some heavier shield. It is similar case as with e.g. finding haste and no other charms. I am not saying there aren't any alternatives then. I'm saying that you are forced to choose this alternative. This is not necessarily bad limitation, although unnecessary from my point of view.

[Leafsnail]

"You should always wield a shield when training shields" is an argument for this proposal, not against it. That's because if the argument's true the only effect that the restriction has is annoying people when they're changing their shield - it has no actual strategic effect.

I don't buy the idea that it has any kind of guiding effect on newbies, I think even the greenest player can work out that shields = a skill that makes you better at using shields.

[Lasty]

This leads to funny situations - "can I kill this kobold on xl 10 or will miscasts kill me before?"

This situation really shouldn't happen. By XL10, you should either have enough training in a basic conjuration that you can kill a kobold with it while holding a shield without serious risks, or else you should have enough training in some other form of offensive skill to kill the kobold without trouble. Also, at XL10, you can kill a kobold by pressing tab a few times, even if you're wielding a cursed -3 dagger with no training.

If you genuinely are having a hard time with shield penalties on your casting success, keep in mind that for casting success penalty, 0.8 of your total EV penalty is discarded. That means that if you're wearing an armor with 0 encumbrance, your penalty for a regular shield goes from 3.0 to 2.2 immediately. After 6 shield skill, it goes down to 1 EV penalty, or the same penalty you would get from wearing a buckler if you're also wearing armor with encumbrance > 0.

[Bart]

Just few numbers if you are interested. HuFE, lvl 10. 9 str 18 int 14 dex. Body armour: robe. Skills trained from 1lvl: dodging, spellcasting, conjurations (focus), fire magic (focus).
Flame tongue: 3% failure with shield, 1% w/o
Sticky flame: 34% failure with shield, 6% w/o
Fireball: 88% failure with shield, 17% w/o
The point of bringing these values is - wearing shield is really severe at the very first moment for spellcaster. I know that with 5 skill in shield it will be back to reasonable levels. I am just pointing that in the beginning it is silly. I was exaggerating with kobold, I thought it is clear. The issue is that at xl 10 you will not level your shield up by killing kobolds. You need to kill more adequate monsters, which are not so trivial anymore. One, if stubborn enough, will find the way. Why is that desirable, though?

Fortunately we have no more this "interesting challenge" with weapons. Let me ask again, because I cannot find good reason in this thread - why are shields so different?

[crate]

I guess I didn't actually say this clearly before, but I'd be in favor of removing the restriction on shield training. I don't see why you are making players who know what they're doing do things that aren't what they want just to protect players who don't know what they're doing. (See my quote about armour/dodging training earlier.)

Probably I'd be fine with removing all training restrictions entirely (it happened for !xp, after all!) but that's usually not important (and admittedly it would be an interface problem to some degree with single-skill-selection for training). It does matter for shields though, so I'd like to see this limitation removed.

[Lasty]

I think others have already laid down the reasons why shields are so different, though you may not agree that those reasons are good ones. I don't have a dog in that fight.

In terms of your numbers, sticky flame at 34% is not ideal, but it is good enough to kill most anything you'd run into at human XL 10 -- and I say that having used it under similar circumstances. Even Flame Tongue is good enough to kill most everything at that level if you've skilled in such a way as to get it to max power. I'm not sure what your actual skill levels are, but it would certainly be both possible and reasonable to get the numbers a little better as a human by XL 10.

[galehar]

So, let's sum up. Most of the time, the restriction has no effect. There are a few edge cases, like bart's example, where you're desperate to use the shield and for some reason can't wait for a buckler a some better spell skills. So you put on the shield and don't use your high level spells. You might run into a few monsters against which you decide to run back and take off the shield so you can blast them with a fireball. That's tedious.
When a strong unique spots you, you might want to go back up the stairs and either take another one or take off the shield. Boring. Or you might decide to quaff !brilliance or !berserk and to try to take him down.
Some would say that it's bad play, others that it's more fun, but whatever. The skill restrictions can creates some tension and bring interesting situation, which is why they were put in place to begin with.
But many had gameplay issues and have been softened or removed. Being the last one, shields restriction feel odd and unintuitive. It doesn't have the bad gameplay effects other had, but it is doesn't have much good effect either (and for many players, not at all). For the clarity and consistency of the game, it should be removed.

[Amnesiac]

I don't understand why people want to use a normal sized shield that badly... Though it annoys even me that you need to switch skills when you unwield your shield with only shields training active.

[crate]

I don't understand why people want to use a normal sized shield that badly...

Well, unlike bucklers, they actually block things!

[wheals]

You could also look at the first post where it talks about trolls and ogres...

[omegonthesane]

You could also look at the first post where it talks about trolls and ogres...

Indeed - I wasn't so much on about the special case of not finding a buckler before XL10 as the "special case" of being an Ogre or Troll and thus being unable to use bucklers at all, and still taking the full penalty from Shields.

I might not have noticed how silly the restriction really is if ogres and trolls, I dunno, counted shields as being one size smaller for the purpose of penalties, since they effectively count shields as being one size smaller for the purpose of existence.

[Bart]

You could also look at the first post where it talks about trolls and ogres...

Indeed - I wasn't so much on about the special case of not finding a buckler before XL10 as the "special case" of being an Ogre or Troll and thus being unable to use bucklers at all, and still taking the full penalty from Shields.

I might not have noticed how silly the restriction really is if ogres and trolls, I dunno, counted shields as being one size smaller for the purpose of penalties, since they effectively count shields as being one size smaller for the purpose of existence.

The difference for ogres and trolls is significant.
"You need 5/15/25 skill to eliminate evasion, melee speed, and casting penalties for bucklers/shields/large shields for normal races, 7/21/- for kobolds and halflings, 9/-/- for spriggans, 3/9/15 for nagas and centaurs, -/9/15 for trolls and ogres."

[omegonthesane]

You could also look at the first post where it talks about trolls and ogres...

Indeed - I wasn't so much on about the special case of not finding a buckler before XL10 as the "special case" of being an Ogre or Troll and thus being unable to use bucklers at all, and still taking the full penalty from Shields.

I might not have noticed how silly the restriction really is if ogres and trolls, I dunno, counted shields as being one size smaller for the purpose of penalties, since they effectively count shields as being one size smaller for the purpose of existence.

The difference for ogres and trolls is significant.
"You need 5/15/25 skill to eliminate evasion, melee speed, and casting penalties for bucklers/shields/large shields for normal races, 7/21/- for kobolds and halflings, 9/-/- for spriggans, 3/9/15 for nagas and centaurs, -/9/15 for trolls and ogres."

You are missing the point completely.

Bucklers exist. Therefore, the amount of Shields training a spellcaster of any race other than Ogre or Troll must have simply to function while being capable of training Shields skill is ZERO. The amount of training an Ogre or a Troll needs to perform the same feat is NON-ZERO, and is in fact quite a bit higher than zero. Due to how the game is currently structured, they have no option but to gain this training whilst suffering penalties so large that they cannot in fact function as casters. It cannot be a matter of being a "late game" branching out either - Ogres who wait until their spellcasting is good enough to cope with a shield are Ogres who have found a great mace, giant club, or giant spiked club, and will therefore switch to that weapon due to having the best M&F in the whole game and ignore Shields forever no matter how good a shield they find.

[Siegurt]

This conversation has also been had before, if you'd like to see the arguments made then, it's here:
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=8808

[omegonthesane]

This conversation has also been had before, if you'd like to see the arguments made then, it's here:
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=8808

In the wrong forum, so may have been missed by relevant persons. That was "wah wah, ogres can't shield", this is the related topic "shields shouldn't have to be worn to be equipped".

[Siegurt]

Just thought I'd point out some of the arguments might be relevant, for those that don't feel like reposting them.

[Amnesiac]

btw, what's the reasoning behind making shields to be wielded in so many turns? Is that some calculated balance? I mean, I know that the same is true for heavy armour, but you can also swap some rings for more AC. Is it so bad if someone would wield a shield in the middle of combat, like after switching from a bow? Note that it doesn't affect 2H weapons and is irrelevant for those who can already do their stuff while wearing a shield, so might as well give them at least the ability to quickly wield/unwield shields for more tactical ideas

[Siegurt]

Indeed, I would use shields a lot more if they took less time to wear/remove