D&D 5E Shield Mastery Feat

FrogReaver said:

I've always thought the RAW meaning was the way it's been stated now despite the original sage advice. The original sage advice persuaded most of us to ignore our feelings on the raw and run it that the shove could be before the attack action not because it necessarily changed our minds about RAW but because it seemed more fun and we had a developer telling us that even if it didn't exactly say it that way that is exactly what was meant. I'm also pretty sure I'm not the only one who thought about it this way.

Click to expand...

I have no idea how many people agreed with your ruling without seeing sage advice, but most people that I've played with over the past few years never read a message board or even know that the twitter version of sage advice exists. Heck, most probably didn't know sage advice existed when it was published.

In my admittedly limited experience, no one else has stated that you could not use the bonus action as long as you attacked on your turn. No one ever questioned sequence. Now, maybe that was because someone piped up and stated that sage advice said the sequence didn't matter ... I have no way of knowing.

All I'm saying is that reasonable people can have different opinions and that the "no way to construe" statement you made was a bit of an overstatement.

As always, rule however you want when you DM. I'll just disagree with you.

Oofta said:

I have no idea how many people agreed with your ruling without seeing sage advice, but most people that I've played with over the past few years never read a message board or even know that the twitter version of sage advice exists. Heck, most probably didn't know sage advice existed when it was published.

In my admittedly limited experience, no one else has stated that you could not use the bonus action as long as you attacked on your turn. No one ever questioned sequence. Now, maybe that was because someone piped up and stated that sage advice said the sequence didn't matter ... I have no way of knowing.

Click to expand...

All I'm saying is that reasonable people can have different opinions and that the "no way to construe" statement you made was a bit of an overstatement.

Click to expand...

Yep and reasonable people also say very unreasonable things plenty of the time. I know I won't convince you but in this case saying that you have a bonus action before you ever take the attack action when the feat requires an attack action for the bonus action is unreasonable.

As always, rule however you want when you DM. I'll just disagree with you.

Click to expand...

That's funny. I rule that the Shield Master bonus attack can be used before the attack action. So I guess that means you disagree and rule that it cannot? lol

Azzy said:

Ergo, my point.



That is not upheld by the text, though—it doesn't say that you must first perform an attack action or that the attack action is granting you the bonus action (it's not, the feat is)—it merely requires you to take the attack action in the same turn as the bonus action.

Click to expand...

If you don't meet the requirements a feat lays out to have a bonus action then you have no bonus action to use. The Shield Master feat only allows you to take a bonus action if you take the attack action on your turn. So, you don't have the bonus action shove attack to use unless you take the attack action on your turn. Once you take the attack action on your turn then you have the bonus action shove attack to use whenever you choose.

I find a lot of uses for Shield Master and shoves:

1. Shoving into a hazard, difficult terrain, off a height, or into a spell effect like Spirit Guardians;

2. Cutting their speed in half by knocking them prone, as it costs half speed to stand up for most.

3. If I am in air proning a creature that can’t hover causes it to fall

4. Giving advantage to that sneak attack , that Paladin smite, that raging barbarian, that fighter with improved critical to increase critical hit chance.

5. Break a grapple for the cost of a bonus action


Of course taking Shield Master also gives you the rest of the benefits of the feat, which are minor but still ok.

You also get to use of the shield itself, and IIRC most published adventures leave magic shields around, and most DMs will leave one for you (and there are some good ones out there) if it’s a big part of your PC.

There was a great Shield in past editions that I can’t recall but you could grind people against a wall or something for good damage.

FrogReaver said:

If you don't meet the requirements a feat lays out to have a bonus action then you have no bonus action to use. The Shield Master feat only allows you to take a bonus action if you take the attack action on your turn.

Click to expand...

Fortunately, you can still take an attack action on your turn without performing it prior to the bonus action. All that the feat requires is that you take the attack action on the same turn.

So, you don't have the bonus action shove attack to use unless you take the attack action on your turn.

Click to expand...

Which you can do even if it's not the first thing you do.

Once you take the attack action on your turn then you have the bonus action shove attack to use whenever you choose.

Click to expand...

You're inserting a requirement that isn't there. There is no "when, then".

Oofta said:

Okay, so at the end of your turn you pushed the goblin back and went over to stand by your wizard. So? You're done with your turn the bugbear can continue to attack the wizard next round and as an added bonus the goblin can come over as well or use their shortbow to help kill the wizard. Heck, you've done the goblin a favor, he can now use his cunning to hide and potentially get advantage.

I've had this discussion before and I've never come up with many scenarios where the feat is worth much.

If my fighter shoves someone away, that just means they're free to move about the room. I want them to pay a penalty (an opportunity attack) for moving to engage someone else. Occasionally I could knock someone over a cliff, but if that's a valid option I'd probably just sacrifice one of my melee attacks.

If my fighter knocks a monster prone, other PCs may be able to get advantage on their attacks but only if they go after my PC, before the prone target and are within 5 feet of the target when they attack. Ranged attacks will be at disadvantage. It's probably a wash tactically in a lot of cases. If I wanted to reliably give my buddies advantage, I'd be a barbarian.

If my fighter moves after knocking the monster prone, I provoke an opportunity attack. It will be at disadvantage of course, but still not a great idea.

What happens next?

• The monster stands and moves to attack my fighter. I took an opportunity attack for no reason.
• The monster stands and does a ranged attack (no disadvantage unless someone else is adjacent) against the target of their choice.
• The monster stands and closes with someone other than my fighter.
• The monster stands, but my fighter has moved too far away for it to engage. It simply attacks someone else. That someone else probably has a worse AC than I do because I'm the one with the shield.
• The monster stands, but my fighter has moved too far away for it to engage. There's no one else in movement range so it simply retreats, possibly behind full cover or to get allies.

None of these scenarios buys me anything, it just makes my fighter a worse tank.

A scenario where it might make sense?

• The creature I knock prone only has 30 ft movement or so.
• We're all in an open field and all other PCs are more than 15 feet away
• My PC had more than 15 feet of movement left on their turn
• The monster can't simply leave or go around a corner
• My buddy has pole-arm master and he hasn't used it yet and the monster has to approach them instead

So I guess it could happen if I have the movement and don't care about opportunity attacks?

Click to expand...

Lot's of ifs, or maybes in your post here.

Anyone can play the if game.

If the wizard goes before the bugbear, he disengages and the bugbear either fights the fighter, or eats an OA, or eats its action doing a disengage.

The point is that the goblin only gets a disadvantaged OA against the fighter if the prone works, or no OA against the fighter at all if shoved.

The goblin is prone, or shoved, or killed with the initial attack. If killed, the fighter can still go over and use the bonus action to knock prone the bugbear or shove it away from the wizard. If not killed, the fighter can still go over and help out without a high chance of him being damaged by the goblin in the process.

Pros and cons.


Your point is that Shield Mastery sucks if it doesn't give advantage on every attack of the PC and that's just not true. Is it better if the PC can use it on every attack where the foe fails the ability check? Sure. But that doesn't mean the feat sucks without that little extra uber. DPR Shield Mastery 50% of the time once per round at level 5 is generally on par with taking STR instead for +1/+1 (without taking into account the defensive parts of SM). DPR Shield mastery with your interpretation makes taking SM instead of STR for a sword and board almost a no brainer. It's just so much better. +5 to hit twice per round >50% of the time vs. +1/+1 100% of the time once one gets to level 5.


PS. The feat has two other abilities that it gives. It's not just about shoving. It's pretty nice against Fireball.

PSS. Even with my interpretation, players in my game take Shield Mastery when playing sword and board. The Fighter in our game has it. He's far from gimped with it.

Azzy said:

Fortunately, you can still take an attack action on your turn without performing it prior to the bonus action. All that the feat requires is that you take the attack action on the same turn.

Click to expand...

Let me make sure I'm understanding. So you are now agreeing with me that you have no bonus action to take unless you take the attack action? The only caveat you are adding that taking the attack action is just a simple declaration and not actually performing any of the attacks associated with it?

FrogReaver said:

Let me make sure I'm understanding. So you are now agreeing with me that you have no bonus action to take unless you take the attack action? The only caveat you are adding that taking the attack action is just a simple declaration and not actually performing any of the attacks associated with it?

Click to expand...

I've been saying that the feat says that the bonus action is contingient upon taking the attack action in the same turn, but the attack action can be taken before or after the bonus action.

One of the problems with Shield Master feat is you can’t directly calculate its effects on DPM for yourself and others provides by the feat. Many people play only mathematically optimized PCs so cant even consider a build with a shield in it as its benefits are subtle, it’s part offense and part defense and completely depends on each players group and campaign.

I can tell you from actually using it and seeing it used on others including 2 PCs all the way up it’s definitely worth it and more important fun to use. Your team will like rolling with advantage and everyone likes more critical hits.

Azzy said:

I've been saying that the feat says that the bonus action is contingient upon taking the attack action in the same turn, but the attack action can be taken before or after the bonus action.

Click to expand...

Thanks for not answering my understanding checkpoint questions