D&D 5E Grappling a Gladiator or Planatar (HELP!)

[drak273]

Hello wonderful people of EnWorld!

Can an enemy break a grapple using their multiattack to perform the shove attack option as one of their attacks?

Now I've read around and even saw Mike Mearls' opinion on this and I do agree the answer is No (though he does say there are some case to case situations). They cannot use a multiattack attack to make the shove attack.

BUT! Here's where I have a problem. Every example I come across, including the question Mike answer, people site things such as Frost Giants and other creatures that state in their multiattack "<so&so> makes three attacks, two greatsword attacks and a stomp." That's easy, no you can't trade one for shove, because it's specifically calling it out as a greatsword attack. Or they say they can't because it says it's an action in the escape a grapple section of that attack (which makes sense).

Then I get to this little diddy for a couple creatures such as the Gladiator, "The gladiator makes three melee attacks or two ranged attacks," or the Planatar, "the planetar makes two melee attacks." Now those aren't specific. Melee attacks include Melee weapon attacks, so their spear or greatsword falls in that category, but so does shove and grapple as per their entry in the Melee attack section.

So with that in mind, can these creatures that get to "make two melee attacks" make use of shove or grapple as part of their multiattack?

I'm waiting on a response hopefully from Mike Mearls as I tweeted at him, but I wanted to get the opinions of other DMs and players so I brought it here. Mind you before you respond this question is not targetting the general multiattack action performed by a lot of creatures, but the specific multiattack action used by creatures such as the gladiator or planatar that doesn't specify the attacks in the multiattack, but give them free reign with multiple "melee attacks."

 

[Lancelot]

Yes, because Rule 0. If the DM thinks that it's thematic, will create an appropriate level of risk/excitement in the game, and applies their ruling consistently... then go for it.

"The gladiator hurls you away with one hand, and frantically stabs... once... with his spear!"

Note that it doesn't negate the PCs' tactical choice to grapple. The creature is still burning one of it's precious attacks to attempt breaking free, and escape is not guaranteed unless there is a size disparity. So, it still makes sense for PCs to attempt grapples in many cases.

Also note that the creature should always declare it's total multiattack action before seeing the results of each choice. So, if the DM declares: "It'll attempt to break the grapple with its first attack, and then stab with its second attack"... then, if the escape attempt fails, it's committed to stabbing with its second action.

 

[Dausuul]

By a very technical reading of the rules: No. To shove, you must take the Attack action. Multiattack is an action of its own; it includes attacks but is not the Attack action, in much the same way that casting fire bolt grants an attack but is not the Attack action.

Therefore, you cannot shove as part of a Multiattack. (However, a PC using Extra Attack can shove twice with it, because Extra Attack augments the Attack action rather than granting a new one.)

However, I wouldn't complain if a DM allowed a monster to do this.

 

[drak273]

As it sits right now I've told my Barbarian grappler that I am only allowing creatures such as the gladiator and planatar to do this because their multiattack is unique in that it allows melee attacks versus most monster that say what they have to use in their multiattack (ex. "greatsword" or "claw").

I do see your point though Dausuul that Multiattack is an ability that expends a creature's action and is not the Attack action. Therefore it can't be used to grapple/shove because the rule specifically calls out that to use those actions it requires the use of the Attack action to trigger.

It's always one of those things that as a DM it makes sense that some creatures would shove off a grappler rather than trying to escape it, especially if it still leaves them in range of a polearm. But with conversations found and had, I'm not going to be able to make a RAW reason for allowing shove/grapple (or at least shove) with multiattack. I wish shove was worded differently. I don't care about the grapple portion so much as the shove.

 

[Lackhand]

Also note that the creature should always declare it's total multiattack action before seeing the results of each choice. So, if the DM declares: "It'll attempt to break the grapple with its first attack, and then stab with its second attack"... then, if the escape attempt fails, it's committed to stabbing with its second action.

Is that specified in the rules? Ignoring grapples for a sec, if a monster is fighting several adventurers and drops one with their first attack from a multi attack, I would think we'd want them to pick a new target for the second one. If a monster is fighting one adventurer and drops them, I'd expect them to close with, and attack, that adventurer's allies.

 

[Lancelot]

Is that specified in the rules? Ignoring grapples for a sec, if a monster is fighting several adventurers and drops one with their first attack from a multi attack, I would think we'd want them to pick a new target for the second one. If a monster is fighting one adventurer and drops them, I'd expect them to close with, and attack, that adventurer's allies.

Good point. Let me rephrase that: "What we do at our table is..."

For my group, we always declare actions before seeing results. So, if a PC takes the attack action with Extra Attack, he has to declare his targets before rolling dice. If he's attacking two enemies (1 fresh, 1 wounded), he has to consider the implications. Attack the wounded target twice to have a better chance of finishing it off, even though one attack might be "wasted"? Or put one on each, which may be more efficient... at the risk of not dropping the wounded one? Of course, if the PC also has a Bonus Action attack (e.g. two-weapon, flurry of blows, shield bash, polearm master, etc), he can declare that separately after the attack action is completed. The same is true with Multiattack monsters.

I honestly don't know what the rules state about that, but my group are old-timers (30+ years RPGing) and it just seems more natural to us to declare all actions first, then see results. It also adds a bit of tension and tactical choice when in situations like the above. We enjoy the additional decision-making. If you can switch the target of your Extra Attack / Multiattack after seeing the results of the first action, it makes it a no-brainer every time.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I wouldn't get too caught up in looking for a unified rule theory. This edition isn't designed that strictly.

If a monster basically fights like a dude, then treat the Multiattack action as though it was the Extra Attack feature. If some of its multiattack is derived from the monster's unusual shape or size, then those parts can't be swapped for a shove or grapple. If a particular monster can make two sword swings and a stomp, then either of the sword swings could be traded out, but the stomp couldn't.