Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Official D&D Sage Advice Compendium Updated
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 7775612" data-attributes="member: 6987520"><p>Those examples show the paradox. If you don't take the Attack action, you are not satisfying the requirement in Shield Master which allows the bonus action to begin with. In order to gain the bonus action, you must take the Attack action on your turn. I am showing you exactly how you can be denied your Attack action, thus you have no granted Bonus action. But, oh, wait, you already used it! How can that be since you didn't meet the requirements for it??? THAT is the paradox you seem oblivious to...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is getting laughable. You are basically arguing this: you shove, and if that shove is followed by the Attack action, then you must have used a bonus action to do it because you are using the Attack action now. But, if for some reason, you are denied your Attack action after the shove, then you are just saying your Attack action is what was used for the shove. I'm sorry, but that is pretty bad logic there. You have to decide the source of the ability that allows you to take an action before you use it, not afterwards. You cannot exchange bonus actions for actions and vice versa.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The paradox is that you used a bonus action granted by a feat and then did not satisfy the condition required to earn that bonus action. "The incongruity seems to arise from assigning a bonus action to the shove-attempt before the condition has been met for using one." Exactly, THAT is precisely what you ARE doing!</p><p></p><p>If you want to shove, how are you doing it? Are you using your Attack action to shove? Ok, go ahead. Are you using the bonus action from Shield Master? Sure, but only if you take the Attack action. No problem I suppose--UNLESS you are denied the ability to take the Attack action. Again, paradox.</p><p></p><p>Suppose you have 1 hit point left and you are facing an orc and a goblin. The orc is going first and the DM decides to Ready the orc's action to Attack if you shove the goblin and knock him prone. You turn comes and you knock the goblin prone using your bonus shove from Shield Master. Since the triggering event occured, the DM has the orc use its reaction to attack you and it hits, knocking you to 0 hit points. You are now unconscious. You used the bonus action from Shield Master, but never used the Attack action that would grant it. Again, paradox. You can't switch what action caused you to shove after the fact.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Except for the fact that he reversed his original ruling on how Shield Master works, so you can doubt it all you want but the evidence of his reversal suggests otherwise.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Except you have. You gained the shove. What benefit is that to you without your Attack action to follow it? Maybe not much, except if you have allies nearby who can still benefit from it. What benefit the bonus action Shove is without your own personal Attack action is situational.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Good, we are making progress at least. We agree you can always shove if you have another means of making an attack, such as through the Attack action.</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>You keep bringing War Magic into this. Maybe that was my fault and I did a while back, I honestly don't remember, but can we agree to keep War Magic out of it? It is a needless complication which cannot prove your point, however much you like to think possible RAI can.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There is no lack of timing. It is very explicit in the SA for Shield Master. In case you missed this from an earlier post of mine, I will paste it here:</p><p></p><p><em>Shield Master</em></p><p>[NEW] <strong>The Shield Master feat lets you shove someone as a bonus action if you take the Attack action. Can you take that bonus action before the Attack action?</strong> "No. The bonus action provided by the Shield Master feat has a precondition: that you take the Attack action on your turn. Intending to take that action isn’t sufficient; you must actually take it before you can take the bonus action. During your turn, you do get to decide when to take the bonus action after you’ve taken the Attack action. This sort of if-then setup appears in many of the game’s rules. The “if” must be satisfied before the “then” comes into play."</p><p></p><p>The text "During your turn, you do get to decide when to take the bonus action after you’ve taken the Attack action." clearly indicates you can decide when to take the bonus action AFTER you've taken the Attack action. The timing has now been specified: after you've taken the Attack action. You are no longer free to take it whenever you want. Also note the use of the word "precondition", pre-, as in before, as in the Attack action. Not after, not simultaneous, before. The Attack action must come before the bonus action shove because it is a precondition <strong><u><em>(**** #1 ****)</em></u></strong>.</p><p></p><p>For further thought, I am pasting yet another post (which I will note, no one refuted in any way):</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>All the evidence is right there above.</p><p><strong><u><em>(**** #1 ****)</em></u></strong>. The Attack action must come first, it is the precondition to gaining the bonus action to shove.</p><p><strong><u><em>(**** #2 ****)</em></u></strong>. The Attack action must be taken in its entirety before you gain the bonus action to shove</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The point above indicates you don't understand the official ruling on the timing element of Shield Master, which of course is the entire basis for the point that the shove comes after you've taken the Attack action.</p><p></p><p>You can disagree with it all you want. Heck, <em>I don't agree with it</em>, and if that is all this boils down to then what are we wasting all this time for? Just say you house-rule it and be done with it. Is there some reason you don't want to say that? Do you think house-rules are a bad thing?</p><p></p><p>We've house-ruled it. I can freely say that. Our table doesn't like the official ruling so we allow the attack-shove-extra attack variant that we like. It sort of follows the official rule... you did take the Attack action first, but we just don't follow part 2 that the Attack action must be completed in its entirety. Works for us.</p><p></p><p>Now, it is late. I've had a long day at work and the next few days will also be long days. If you reply and I don't have time to respond before the weekend, please be patient and accept my apologies.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DND_Reborn, post: 7775612, member: 6987520"] Those examples show the paradox. If you don't take the Attack action, you are not satisfying the requirement in Shield Master which allows the bonus action to begin with. In order to gain the bonus action, you must take the Attack action on your turn. I am showing you exactly how you can be denied your Attack action, thus you have no granted Bonus action. But, oh, wait, you already used it! How can that be since you didn't meet the requirements for it??? THAT is the paradox you seem oblivious to... This is getting laughable. You are basically arguing this: you shove, and if that shove is followed by the Attack action, then you must have used a bonus action to do it because you are using the Attack action now. But, if for some reason, you are denied your Attack action after the shove, then you are just saying your Attack action is what was used for the shove. I'm sorry, but that is pretty bad logic there. You have to decide the source of the ability that allows you to take an action before you use it, not afterwards. You cannot exchange bonus actions for actions and vice versa. The paradox is that you used a bonus action granted by a feat and then did not satisfy the condition required to earn that bonus action. "The incongruity seems to arise from assigning a bonus action to the shove-attempt before the condition has been met for using one." Exactly, THAT is precisely what you ARE doing! If you want to shove, how are you doing it? Are you using your Attack action to shove? Ok, go ahead. Are you using the bonus action from Shield Master? Sure, but only if you take the Attack action. No problem I suppose--UNLESS you are denied the ability to take the Attack action. Again, paradox. Suppose you have 1 hit point left and you are facing an orc and a goblin. The orc is going first and the DM decides to Ready the orc's action to Attack if you shove the goblin and knock him prone. You turn comes and you knock the goblin prone using your bonus shove from Shield Master. Since the triggering event occured, the DM has the orc use its reaction to attack you and it hits, knocking you to 0 hit points. You are now unconscious. You used the bonus action from Shield Master, but never used the Attack action that would grant it. Again, paradox. You can't switch what action caused you to shove after the fact. Except for the fact that he reversed his original ruling on how Shield Master works, so you can doubt it all you want but the evidence of his reversal suggests otherwise. Except you have. You gained the shove. What benefit is that to you without your Attack action to follow it? Maybe not much, except if you have allies nearby who can still benefit from it. What benefit the bonus action Shove is without your own personal Attack action is situational. Good, we are making progress at least. We agree you can always shove if you have another means of making an attack, such as through the Attack action. You keep bringing War Magic into this. Maybe that was my fault and I did a while back, I honestly don't remember, but can we agree to keep War Magic out of it? It is a needless complication which cannot prove your point, however much you like to think possible RAI can. There is no lack of timing. It is very explicit in the SA for Shield Master. In case you missed this from an earlier post of mine, I will paste it here: [I]Shield Master[/I] [NEW] [B]The Shield Master feat lets you shove someone as a bonus action if you take the Attack action. Can you take that bonus action before the Attack action?[/B] "No. The bonus action provided by the Shield Master feat has a precondition: that you take the Attack action on your turn. Intending to take that action isn’t sufficient; you must actually take it before you can take the bonus action. During your turn, you do get to decide when to take the bonus action after you’ve taken the Attack action. This sort of if-then setup appears in many of the game’s rules. The “if” must be satisfied before the “then” comes into play." The text "During your turn, you do get to decide when to take the bonus action after you’ve taken the Attack action." clearly indicates you can decide when to take the bonus action AFTER you've taken the Attack action. The timing has now been specified: after you've taken the Attack action. You are no longer free to take it whenever you want. Also note the use of the word "precondition", pre-, as in before, as in the Attack action. Not after, not simultaneous, before. The Attack action must come before the bonus action shove because it is a precondition [B][U][I](**** #1 ****)[/I][/U][/B]. For further thought, I am pasting yet another post (which I will note, no one refuted in any way): All the evidence is right there above. [B][U][I](**** #1 ****)[/I][/U][/B]. The Attack action must come first, it is the precondition to gaining the bonus action to shove. [B][U][I](**** #2 ****)[/I][/U][/B]. The Attack action must be taken in its entirety before you gain the bonus action to shove The point above indicates you don't understand the official ruling on the timing element of Shield Master, which of course is the entire basis for the point that the shove comes after you've taken the Attack action. You can disagree with it all you want. Heck, [I]I don't agree with it[/I], and if that is all this boils down to then what are we wasting all this time for? Just say you house-rule it and be done with it. Is there some reason you don't want to say that? Do you think house-rules are a bad thing? We've house-ruled it. I can freely say that. Our table doesn't like the official ruling so we allow the attack-shove-extra attack variant that we like. It sort of follows the official rule... you did take the Attack action first, but we just don't follow part 2 that the Attack action must be completed in its entirety. Works for us. Now, it is late. I've had a long day at work and the next few days will also be long days. If you reply and I don't have time to respond before the weekend, please be patient and accept my apologies. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Official D&D Sage Advice Compendium Updated
Top