Shield Proficiency in (OSR) D&D

The blogpost Why A Soldier Is A Rogue Not A Fighter is a great example of thinking about character classes in new ways. It focuses on 5th Edition D&D, but it inspired me to ponder the concept in earlier (and OSR) editions.

One detail repeatedly stood out: Rogues (I do prefer that class name change) are not proficient with shields. While a soldier-Rogue wielding a (two-handed) polearm would not need it, a shield is all the more valuable when one is wearing only light armor. It should be there.

Then it hit me. If I rephrase “not proficient with shields” as “gains no benefit from using a shield,” the dissonance between mechanics and aesthetics disappears. We so often let the game mechanics alter our roleplay; e.g., if your character gains no mechanical benefit from using a shield, you would have them stop using one. But how would they know, in-character, as inexperienced soldiers? If a shield was available, and they were not wielding a two-handed weapon, they would certainly use it.

I am presuming a 1st-level Rogue here as that is what a unit of village militia would consist of. Higher level Rogues could recognize the non-benefit and/or learn how to benefit (i.e., be given proficiency).