D&D 5E Shield Mastery Feat

[Sean Culligan]

I don't see anywhere the "declare action but not take it yet" others see except under ready.

Actually this is in how the game is played. You Must tell the DM what you are doing on your turn. You have to start off saying things like, "I attack", "I dash", "I withdraw", etc.
If you say "I Attack" then the Shield master can get a bonus shove attack. There are very few extra attacks that are bonus actions and the reason you must "take the attack action" is because the bonus attack is actually part of the attack action. This is the same for two weapon fighting and Polearm Master. In fact the Polearm Master feat is described exactly how many polearms were utilized in that the but end was used first, followed by a downward stroke. So there you have it. Bonus goes first.

 

[Krachek]

Definitely have to disagree with that! I love bonus actions and enjoy when my players can use them to effectively augment an encounter. Personally, I wish there were more uses for them and Reactions as well, but that is my opinion.

I can certainly understand, however, why they might be frustrating to others if they don't or can't agree on how they are used.

You may like bonus action, but 16 pages of counter arguments on its timing is not the desired effect for a simple ruling.
Too much players have ask Why I can’t? about bonus action.

When I see topics like : optimize action economy, I can only realize that ruling have lost its elegance to shift into an mechanical mess.
Bonus action attack should have been include somehow into extra attack.
Concentration spell could include a “control spell feature”.
And for multiple actions in a turn Rogue the only exception.

 

[5ekyu]

Actually this is in how the game is played. You Must tell the DM what you are doing on your turn. You have to start off saying things like, "I attack", "I dash", "I withdraw", etc.
if you say "I Attack" then the Shield master can get a bonus shove attack. There are very few extra attacks that are bonus actions and the reason you must "take the attack action" is because the bonus shove is actually part of the attack action. This is the same for two weapon fighting and Polearm Master. In fact the Polearm Master feat is described exactly how many polearms were utilized in that the but end was used first, followed by a downward stroke. So there you have it. Bonus goes first.

You state what your character is doing but that does not mean you declare "take the attack action" or that you define the totality of your turn the start...

Specifically, you resolve pieces of your turn step by step until done, in sequence and they are resolved in sequence not out of sequence. What the future might hold is just a dream, not an action until it is done.

If you say "Roy walks over and attacks the stinkin' vermin that shot Ftitz... " Roy has **not yet** attacked then and there simply because you said those words. There has been no Attack Action taken yet... Roy could be interrupted on his walk by a trapdoor that stops him 10' to the bottom and then Roy doesn't get there. Roy can then try any action he wants because he has not yet "taken" an attack action.

The same case if in play when the desire to shove as z bonus action before having taken an attack action.

I know one can choose to interpret "if you take.." as " if you are planning to take later..." cuz one wants it to be so but that kind of hostile reading gets nowhere fast.

Just three feats up from shield master we see...

"If you come across a spell in written form, such as a magical spell scroll or a wizard’s spellbook, you might be able to add it to your ritual book. "

Compare to...

"If you take the Attack action on your turn, you can use a bonus action to try to shove a creature within 5 feet of you with your shield."

So, are we to believe that the lack of saying "after" or "when" in both those cases was intentional and they meant for you to bonus action shove before you take the attack action as well as scribe the ritual into your book before you come across it in written form?

It's just a few feats back from Shirld Mastery.

How much time travel by " if" is in DnD, I wonder?

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

You may like bonus action, but 16 pages of counter arguments on its timing is not the desired effect for a simple ruling.
Too much players have ask Why I can’t? about bonus action.

Well, as I stated in my post, the ruling is pretty evident for me. I have given multiple examples why and nothing contradicts it as far as I know. Frankly, although people may be debating how or when a said bonus action can be used, I think only one (*wink wink*) has expressed the idea in this thread of not having them from what I've read (granted, I might have missed one... I am not about to spend the time scanning the entire thread to be certain ).

Once I explain how a player can use a bonus action for a certain ability, they don't question it. There is always a logical argument behind my positions to them or a rule as written to point out. So it might be a mechanical mess for you and some others, but for me it isn't and I welcome more.

Much of 5E is up to the individual DM/group to rule on. If you don't like bonus actions, as few as there really are, you could fold them into other actions as desired. And personally, I agree, 16 pages of debate is pointless as no one is right or wrong, it is all a matter of interpretation.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

...

If you say "Roy walks over and attacks the stinkin' vermin that shot Ftitz... " Roy has **not yet** attacked then and there simply because you said those words. There has been no Attack Action taken yet... Roy could be interrupted on his walk by a trapdoor that stops him 10' to the bottom and then Roy doesn't get there. Roy can then try any action he wants because he has not yet "taken" an attack action.

...

Roy isn't attacking and he, thus, isn't using his shove bonus action. He is moving, which the DM interrupts with a trapdoor, and allows Roy to try another action. But, Roy did take the Attack action. The DM intervened and stopped his intended action. Is that Roy's fault? No.

Suppose Roy was being attacked by a rottin' vermin. He declares his intention to attack the stinkin' vermin that shot Fritz. With the Shield Master feat, he first uses his Shove bonus action to push the rottin' vermin engaging him 5 feet back, allowing him to move without opportunity attack. He moves towards the stinkin' vermin and the DM says "Whoa, there partner! You got yerself a pit trap you just walked over! Better roll that Dex save to jump clear! Oops, ya failed slicker. Sorry, (rolls a die), that's 4 hit points of damage. Guess you won't be attack that stinkin' vermin after all."

"But wait!" says Roy. "I only used part of my move. I still have 20 feet left! Thanks to my Athletic feat, I can climb out without extra move, so I then have 10 feet left and I finish my move to attack that stinkin' vermin!"

"Hmm..." the DM ponders. "I reckon yer right, Roy. Ok, make your attack roll!"

The intent of the Shield Master feat is to allow you to make a Shove "attack" without having you use up an actual "attack" roll. Having it cost you a Bonus action is simply a way to represent that cost in terms of game time, preventing you from using your Bonus action for something else, like Second Wind.

At any rate, a round is only 6 seconds in 5E, so I make my players declare actions before rolling initiative (we roll every round, btw), and you can't change your action when your turn arrives (with certain exceptions like deciding to Dodge or Disengage) If you planned to attack, you can't suddenly switch to casting a spell since you weren't prepared to do it. If you are going to allow players to change actions when their turn arises, why not let them use a bonus action granted by a feat when they want during that turn???

And how would it be any different if Roy simply had two attacks and wanted to use one of those for the Shove attack? He still Shoves the rottin' vermin attacking him back, moves, falls into the pit, climbs out, finishes his move, and attacks the stinkin' vermin. No different except one uses the Bonus Action for the Shove and the other forces the player to utilize one attack granted by his Extra Attack feature.

 

[Azzy]

There's been, what, six printings of the PHB so far and they've included errata several times to clarify the wording of different rules. You'd think that they'd take the time to clarify this as well considering that this has been address by SA twice (with different results.

If they want the timing of the bonus action after an attack action, they could alter the text you say "when you take an attack action on your turn you can then use a bonus action to..." It's simple, specific, and unambiguous.

 

[smbakeresq]

Or just use the same wording as Monks for their martial arts, “when you use the Attack action..”

 

[Sean Culligan]

There's been, what, six printings of the PHB so far and they've included errata several times to clarify the wording of different rules. You'd think that they'd take the time to clarify this as well considering that this has been address by SA twice (with different results.

If they want the timing of the bonus action after an attack action, they could alter the text you say "when you take an attack action on your turn you can then use a bonus action to..." It's simple, specific, and unambiguous.

Change that "when" to an "after" and I can agree. Otherwise it is still just as ambiguous as an "if".

Edit: Actually its worse... "when" is synonymous with "while".

 

[Oofta]

Except that the bonus action rules specify that you can use your bonus action whenever your want (unless it is spelled out otherwise).


Plus:

PHB 190

Other Activity on Your Turn

You can communicate however you are able, through brief utterances and gestures, as you take your turn.

You can also interact with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or your action.


The game is set up to allow the players to do thing in whatever order they wish. I just think that the literalist view of what an attack action is states that it is a melee or ranged attack, and an attack states that it requires an attack roll. So (and this is just my literalist view of it), the first attack has to be done in order for it to be an attack action that is in play, after that, you can do whatever you want, whenever you want on your turn (shy of a specific rule stating otherwise).

I don't actually see gray areas here.

The "can't interrupt an action" is from another tweet that I don't have bookmarked. Or maybe I'm just suffering from old-timers. Who knows.

But Crawford is quite clear: you cannot take the shield master bonus action until after the attack action is complete.

"Clarification about bonus actions: if a feature says you can do X as a bonus action if you do Y, you must do Y before you can do X. For Shield Master, that means the bonus action must come after the Attack action. You decide when it happens afterward that turn"

In any case, I plan on continuing to ignore the rule because it's just so illogical. As long as someone declares they are taking the attack action, I don't care if they make an attack instead.

 

[Krachek]

A good rule feel obvious, intuitive and is easy to remember.
Bad rule feel illogical, encourage house ruling or debate, and sometimes need a flow chart or a reminder to apply it. Ex.: who remember by heart what are the effect of level 3 of exhaustion?