Factually correct. It's the lack of Athletics that makes the difference. Such a trivially easy fix, and such a gaping hole for the design and playtest to have missed.
D&D 5E Does anyone else feel like the action economy and the way actions work in general in 5e both just suck?
- Thread starter Son of the Serpent
- Start date
Bolares
Legend
Wait, what? There is no official 5e rules outside of actual D&D books. Tweets are rullings, not rules. They are not errata either, and in fact, they never were.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad
You misunderstood or misremembered. The rulings you're looking for do not exist. You don't even need Google or Twitter to find them: if such a ruling had every come down it would have been heatedly discussed here. Come on man, you're not some mega-genius who spotted some secret combo of rulings from Twitter that nobody else in the universe of 5e fandom had spotted before which results in such a controversial and extravagant result. You just made a mistake on this one. It's OK. It happens. We're all human here.
TwoSix
Everyone's literal second-favorite poster
Heh...I actually have a fight with a bunch of ogres coming back, I have to remember to change the stat block.
Bolares
Legend
On the topic of monster statblocks and actions that they can do, following raw, the MM says this:
"When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures, such as the Dash or Hide action, as described in the Player’s Handbook. "
Looking at the PHB, the book desbribes actions in combat as follows:
"When you take your action on your turn, you can take one of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action that you improvise. Many monsters have action options of their own in their stat blocks.
When you describe an action not detailed elsewhere in the rules, the DM tells you whether that action is possible and what kind of roll you need to make, if any, to determine success or failure."
Other than this, the book describes Attack, Cast a Spell Dash, Disengage, Dodge, Help, Hide, Ready and Use an Object.
So, in my interpretation, all the listed actions, and improvised actions are permited to monster per RAW, it's up to the DM to balance them well.
EDIT:Reading the post again, a point that could be made is that "you" on the PHB section describing improvised actions refers to PCs only, so I went back and checked. The start of the combat chapter clarifies it like this:
"This chapter provides the rules you need for your characters and monsters to engage in combat, whether it is a brief skirmish or an extended conflict in a dungeon or on a field of battle. Throughout this chapter, the rules address you, the player or Dungeon Master. The Dungeon Master controls all the monsters and nonplayer characters involved in combat, and each other player controls an adventurer. “You” can also mean the character or monster that you control."
"When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures, such as the Dash or Hide action, as described in the Player’s Handbook. "
Looking at the PHB, the book desbribes actions in combat as follows:
"When you take your action on your turn, you can take one of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action that you improvise. Many monsters have action options of their own in their stat blocks.
When you describe an action not detailed elsewhere in the rules, the DM tells you whether that action is possible and what kind of roll you need to make, if any, to determine success or failure."
Other than this, the book describes Attack, Cast a Spell Dash, Disengage, Dodge, Help, Hide, Ready and Use an Object.
So, in my interpretation, all the listed actions, and improvised actions are permited to monster per RAW, it's up to the DM to balance them well.
EDIT:Reading the post again, a point that could be made is that "you" on the PHB section describing improvised actions refers to PCs only, so I went back and checked. The start of the combat chapter clarifies it like this:
"This chapter provides the rules you need for your characters and monsters to engage in combat, whether it is a brief skirmish or an extended conflict in a dungeon or on a field of battle. Throughout this chapter, the rules address you, the player or Dungeon Master. The Dungeon Master controls all the monsters and nonplayer characters involved in combat, and each other player controls an adventurer. “You” can also mean the character or monster that you control."
Undrave
Legend
I agree completely! And the fact that this wasn't done is the flaw IMO. Which is why our table house-ruled skills and saves into ALL monsters.
As for the feat, that rule only applies if you have the feat. Nothing to say you couldn't give all Ogres (who I think we could easily see wrestling and shoving each other around since birth) the Grappler feat.
As for the particular move, the shove uses the same mechanics as the grapple. If you have two Ogres, one could shove and the other could grapple if the shove is successful, but since they only get one attack, a single Ogre can't do both as it would take two rounds. It is possible to grapple and then shove prone, but again, two rounds and the target has to not escape the grapple, which is roughly 50/50 again...
Good house-rules are basically the only way to solve it if the table wants creatures to be good at things they should be good at. Because they were often designed poorly, too many monsters are just bags of HP otherwise. Pity.
I think you could easily home-brew an Ogre Grappler or Ogre Wrestler who is just really good at it and has both the Grappler feat and the ability to shove+grapple smaller creatures in one action, in addition with Athletics proficiency. I think it would make it more interesting if it was something a specific kind of ogres could do than something to expect of ALL ogres.
the fact it doesn't exist RAW is sad but I don't think it's a HUGE hole.
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
I don't think it is a huge hole either, it is just a flaw in the design IMO and as myself and so many others have noted: an easy fix
But then that bears the question: why not have it in the first place???
I find it difficult to believe such things never came up in the playtest and initial design, so it must have been a conscious decision IMO to not give them Athletics and other monsters skills they probably should have had.
Ogres have 19 STR. Characters can be just as strong while a principle of training would include using size against an opponent. The typical 10 STR no proficiency most characters fail the majority here. Small races have the option to escape a grapple but not initiate it.
I think some just as strong as an ogre but skilled in grappling should have an advantage.
If someone thinks Ogres should have a natural bonus just giving a natural bonus of some sort is fair. Easy enough to do.
I think some just as strong as an ogre but skilled in grappling should have an advantage.
If someone thinks Ogres should have a natural bonus just giving a natural bonus of some sort is fair. Easy enough to do.
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
I think you are skimming a lot of posts? I don't recall anyone arguing that they couldn't do it. They just aren't that great IME and it is not an effective tactic--they are usually better off just attacking in most cases.
Similar Threads
