I recently have a fighter thats picked up shield master. The shove attack strikes me somewhat OP. Anyone have thoughts on this? You don't need to hit, its just an opposed athletics/strength. Even a low level fighter can easily get +7 Athletics. As 95% of NPCs/creatures have neither a Str save or athletics proficiency, its exceedingly rare for an opponent to make a successful check against a shove attack? It seems to pretty much guarentee the party gets advantage on attacks - which is a huge bonus. I don't have a problem with the shove ability, just in how easy it seems to be able to be employed...
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E Shove attack OP?
- Thread starter Amatiel
- Start date
Xeviat
Hero
I believe this is a fault of monsters not having skill training frequently.
Personally, the way I "fix" this in my games is to have push have a DC, 8+Str+Prof. I don't like what Expertise can do to skills used to "attack".
I dislike that it's an every round thing, though. It's boring. I'd rather see it as a reaction to a melee attack against you that misses; you blocked with your shield and pushed them over. But, a 5th level fighter could give up 1 attack to trip too, so it could be every round if they wanted it.
Personally, the way I "fix" this in my games is to have push have a DC, 8+Str+Prof. I don't like what Expertise can do to skills used to "attack".
I dislike that it's an every round thing, though. It's boring. I'd rather see it as a reaction to a melee attack against you that misses; you blocked with your shield and pushed them over. But, a 5th level fighter could give up 1 attack to trip too, so it could be every round if they wanted it.
transcendantviewer
First Post
Well, keep in mind, a Barbarian with Fell Handed could do the very same. They give themselves Advantage, make an attack, and if they roll well, the target just goes prone. It's the same effect. It's obvious that the game designers don't much mind. I play a high level game quite often and I have to say, Advantage is strong, but falls off when characters start adding +8s and up to attack rolls.
Hussar
Legend
Thing is though, you're giving up an attack to do this. That's a pretty big deal. Giving up damage to possibly grant advantage until the target's next turn isn't OP IMO. Even if I have a +8 or 9 on my die roll, it's not guaranteed that I will win the opposed check, although pretty likely. By the same token granting advantage to an ally isn't a guarantee of damage either.
Seems pretty on the mark to me.
Seems pretty on the mark to me.
The shield bash from Shield Master feat uses your bonus action and you can only use it if you are going to use or have used the Attack action that round. So, they aren't giving up an attack for this.
Now, the Shove action which anyone can use, does use an Attack from the Attack action in place of an actual attack.
The Crimson Binome
Hero
Yes, the shoving and grappling rules are broken, largely (but not exclusively) due to monsters not having skills. You should fix this by giving monsters the skills they should rightfully possess, and adding their proficiency bonus to resist if they should logically be trained in Athletics.
ad_hoc
(they/them)
Yeah, it's more that monsters aren't designed with opposed checks in mind. Most of them only have skills if they are expected to use that skill.
Monsters in 5e in general are only given things they're expected to us. It's good design in that it makes it much easier to read their stat blocks and makes them quicker to play.
The problem is that there are a few opposed skill checks in the game which they are then bad at. Everything should have been a saving throw.
Monsters in 5e in general are only given things they're expected to us. It's good design in that it makes it much easier to read their stat blocks and makes them quicker to play.
The problem is that there are a few opposed skill checks in the game which they are then bad at. Everything should have been a saving throw.
Xeviat
Hero
All defensive things should be saving throws. Someone's sneaking up on your? Wisdom save. You're trying to search for something? Perception check.
CapnZapp
Legend
Though this happens all the time (player characters have excellent AC, lots of monsters have weak attack bonuses), so what's the difference in practical play?
Bear in mind that shoving is limited to enemies up to one size larger, so the strategy is not always available, and may require some team-play to be enabled. And you cannot effectively spam this strategy against multiple opponents without extra investments, as in their turn they will just stand up again, so it is more useful for focus-firing. On the other hand, ranged attackers might end up with disadvantage to attack this adversary, so it could make the group offence less focused in some circumstances, which is usually suboptimal.
About monsters not being designed with these rules in mind and etc., I disagree. The way I see it, most monsters don't have proficiency bonuses to skills simply because the game assumes most creatures must default to atribute checks for skills, and monsters with some skill proficiencies really do feel unique (grimlocks are proficient in athletics!). Even the heroes will have to default sometimes. For instance, heroes not built for frontline usually do not have proficiency bonus for opposed athletics checks. Surely the game skews the whole skill system in favor of the heroes. This enables them to use the skills they are proficient with, which for me is a completely favorable consequence. If Bob the sword-and-board champion is constantly faced with monsters that can already have higher atribute scores and still frequently add proficiency bonuses to their skill checks, he will see shield mastery, or even the whole shoving rules as rather niche, and might simply lock himself in the boring hit-for-damage mode, not engaging in the more tactical and fun aspects of combat.
On a side-note, shoving should be valued by the players not only as a source of advantage on attacks. It can also be used to change the positioning of enemies, and to take advantage of hazards in the battlefield, so there is a lot of tactical potential in it.
If you are worried about the fact that shield master makes this shove a bonus action, just remember that it is a feat investment. A different fighter with a polearm build would take PAM, earning a bonus-action attack, for example, which some people will perceive as superior.
About monsters not being designed with these rules in mind and etc., I disagree. The way I see it, most monsters don't have proficiency bonuses to skills simply because the game assumes most creatures must default to atribute checks for skills, and monsters with some skill proficiencies really do feel unique (grimlocks are proficient in athletics!). Even the heroes will have to default sometimes. For instance, heroes not built for frontline usually do not have proficiency bonus for opposed athletics checks. Surely the game skews the whole skill system in favor of the heroes. This enables them to use the skills they are proficient with, which for me is a completely favorable consequence. If Bob the sword-and-board champion is constantly faced with monsters that can already have higher atribute scores and still frequently add proficiency bonuses to their skill checks, he will see shield mastery, or even the whole shoving rules as rather niche, and might simply lock himself in the boring hit-for-damage mode, not engaging in the more tactical and fun aspects of combat.
On a side-note, shoving should be valued by the players not only as a source of advantage on attacks. It can also be used to change the positioning of enemies, and to take advantage of hazards in the battlefield, so there is a lot of tactical potential in it.
If you are worried about the fact that shield master makes this shove a bonus action, just remember that it is a feat investment. A different fighter with a polearm build would take PAM, earning a bonus-action attack, for example, which some people will perceive as superior.
Similar Threads
