D&D 5E Reckless Attack and Shield Master Interactions

[Lucas Blackstone]

Ah contraire! The rules don't define shoving as a special melee attack. Instead they define a special melee attack you can make while using the Attack action to shove a creature. The rules actually do not define anything about a shove that is not done while using the Attack action.

That's what makes this question so interesting!

They do define Shoving a Creature. The feat makes an exception to the normal rule of using the attack action to do so. There is nothing that says it is no longer a special melee attack. The feat does say that you use a bonus action to do it instead of the attack action.

Edit: Hooray, the Crawford said it is an attack too, but I was just going by what was in the book.

 

[abirdcall]

Rule please?

I bet you can't find it because PHB pg 195 last section doesn't say what you think it does...

It literally does. In the exact words.

Shoving a Creature
Using the Attack action, you can make a special melee attack to shove a creature...this attack replaces one of them.

 

[Illithidbix]

So... I presume the use of this is to try to use the Bonus Action shove to knock the target prone (granting Advantage on attacks made within 5') *before* choosing whether you use reckless attack, yes?

Trying to understand RAW... to go through all the issues: that the exact wording on shield mastery

"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"

Since there is no timing specified on the bonus action, then you can make the shove BEFORE the attack - this matches the rules on bonus attacks and also has been confirmed in at least a Crawford tweet. (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/29/shield-master-feat/)

Now, it does mean that your action has to be the attack action, despite you not yet rolling to hit when you do the shove.

Now if you really want to get into semantics compare:

If there’s ever any question whether something you’re doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you’re making an attack roll, you’re making an attack.

Using the Attack action, you can make a special melee attack to shove a creature, either to knock it prone or push it away from you. If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them.

Personally my RAW interpretation would go with the elegant "attack roll" guideline.
As a DM, I would probably allow that.

I would however think it matches the *intent* of Reckless attack if my DM decided that I needed to declare before I use my bonus shield shove and would endeavour not to be a whiny **** about it.

 

[FrogReaver]

Reckless Attack: "...Doing so gives you advantage on melee weapon attack rolls using Strength..."

Jeremy Crawford on twitter in June 2015: Grapple and Shove are special attacks that use an ability check instead of an attack roll.
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/06/08/shove-grapple-attacks/

No attack roll, so no reckless attack.

Like I said, open and shut.

I will confess that I was wrong to say that shove is not a special flavour of attack though. Jeremy Crawford says that it is, so it must be so.

FYI, it's obvious Reckless Attack doesn't give a shove advantage. The purpose of my inquiry was to determine for sure whether I would have to use Reckless Attack before knowing the results of the shove since knocking the creature prone also grants me advantage, thus making using reckless attack potentially redundant.

 

[FrogReaver]

It literally does. In the exact words.

Shoving a Creature
Using the Attack action, you can make a special melee attack to shove a creature...this attack replaces one of them.

There is a difference between saying that and saying shoving a creature is a special melee attack. Comprehend?

 

[FrogReaver]

So... I presume the use of this is to try to use the Bonus Action shove to knock the target prone (granting Advantage on attacks made within 5') *before* choosing whether you use reckless attack, yes?

Trying to understand RAW... to go through all the issues: that the exact wording on shield mastery



Since there is no timing specified on the bonus action, then you can make the shove BEFORE the attack - this matches the rules on bonus attacks and also has been confirmed in at least a Crawford tweet. (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/29/shield-master-feat/)

Now, it does mean that your action has to be the attack action, despite you not yet rolling to hit when you do the shove.

Now if you really want to get into semantics compare:





Personally my RAW interpretation would go with the elegant "attack roll" guideline.
As a DM, I would probably allow that.

I would however think it matches the *intent* of Reckless attack if my DM decided that I needed to declare before I use my bonus shield shove and would endeavour not to be a whiny **** about it.

Yes, I think you said it much more elegantly than I.

 

[Illithidbix]

If there’s ever any question whether something you’re doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you’re making an attack roll, you’re making an attack.

vs

@oilpainting71 There's no contradiction. They are unusual attacks that lack attack rolls. @warhuck

Thanks Crawford...

 

[FrogReaver]

They do define Shoving a Creature. The feat makes an exception to the normal rule of using the attack action to do so. There is nothing that says it is no longer a special melee attack. The feat does say that you use a bonus action to do it instead of the attack action.

Edit: Hooray, the Crawford said it is an attack too, but I was just going by what was in the book.

Shoving a creature: "Using the Attack action, you can make a special melee attack to shove a creature..." is not the same thing as "A shove is a special melee attack". One kind of shove is definitely a special melee attack. The kind that requires you to use your attack action. However, nothing is said about the kind of shove that requires you to use your bonus action.

 

[Bardic Dave]

FYI, it's obvious Reckless Attack doesn't give a shove advantage. The purpose of my inquiry was to determine for sure whether I would have to use Reckless Attack before knowing the results of the shove since knocking the creature prone also grants me advantage, thus making using reckless attack potentially redundant.

Gotcha. Could have made that clearer in the original post. Yup, there's no clear RAW on this, but I think it's totally within the spirit of 5E to let you see the outcome of your shove first before deciding to use reckless attack.

I would let a player in my game do it even if they weren't using Shield Master, but that's definitely questionable by RAW.

 

[FrogReaver]

Gotcha. Could have made that clearer in the original post. Yup, there's no clear RAW on this, but I think it's totally within the spirit of 5E to let you see the outcome of your shove first before deciding to use reckless attack.

I would let a player in my game do it even if they weren't using Shield Master, but that's definitely questionable by RAW.

I don't think RAW is clear on it. I would say RAI. Or "Thus saith Jeremy Crawford rules" are more clear

However, I think most DM's would look at that situation and probably make the same call as you.