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
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Shield master on twitter
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="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 7418728" data-attributes="member: 6704184"><p>Let me just say fist, to everyone, that I dislike and have little respect for pedantry, and pretty much never consider semantics important outside of formal debate/academic discussions. </p><p></p><p>So, if I come across as dismissive toward an argument, that is probably why. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There is a word for that, already. Several, in fact. While I’ve no problem with people defining words differently, there is nothing restrictive about what I said. I’ve simply never encountered “cheese/cheesy/cheesing(the system/game)” being used to mean the same thing as “overpowered”, “broken”, or similar. I’ve only seen it used to suggest that a person is exploiting the system in a “cheesy” manner, ie, a manner that bends or perverts the intention of the thing being used. </p><p></p><p>The “bag of rats” is cheese, counterspell is (in some opinions) overpowered. To some people, readying an action to cast dispel magic for when a caster casts a spell can be cheesy-bordering on outright cheating, especially if you exploit the wording and previous DM rulings about readied actions to abuse reaction timing, and effectively counterspell without having it prepared/known. </p><p></p><p>I don’t see what is restrictive about the “cheese”/“overpowered” distinction. It just seems more useful than having them mean ge same thing, to me. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Knocking people down after/instead of/as part of attacking has been useful in my group literally hundreds of times, between several editions. Doing it without sacrificing any attacks per round, which are *much* more important than your bonus action for nearly any S&B combatant in 5e, is very useful for any group that bothers to strategize as a group. If your group is too range heavy to benefit from it, then using it as you have been sounds rather counter to teamwork. Either you are imposing disadvantage on ally attacks in order to get advantage on your own, or you’re splitting fire to avoid that. </p><p></p><p>I guarantee, even in a group that is mostly ranged, in an initiative where the enemy goes right after me, I can use the feat to destroy an enemy while the team is largely unharmed by them (assuming fight where shoving even works at all and we aren’t being swarmed, which just calls for very different tactics). Either I’m knocking them down and then moving away, because they are primarily melee, forcing them to either waste a turn dashing or use their less effective ranged attack while the team safely rains death, or I’m keeping the caster/archer from getting away from me by halving their effective speed per round. Without losing any attacks, which is a big deal for any character. Even a paladin or ranger usually won’t need to be using their bonus most rounds for other stuff, but giveng up a normal attack hurts. A feat that lets you get full use out of shoving without any loss in attack power, plus some defensive abilities, is really nice. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>yep. I’m not too worried about small changes that only really “hurt” in optimized games. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So, the feat helps shore up a weakness in heavy armored characters, making them not dreadful at dex saves? </p><p>Seems pretty good. </p><p></p><p>You keep bringing up Resilient. Why do you think it’s relevant here? Does it make you better with a shield? </p><p></p><p>It’s almost like different feats serve differing purposes! Crazy!</p><p></p><p>if you want to be significantly better as succeeding on dex saves, you build for that, one way or another. If you want a small suite of shield benefits to help you better make use of a shield and better fulfill the image of a shield user in fantasy, you build for that. SM accomplishes the thing it’s built to do. </p><p></p><p>If what it does isn’t interesting to you, especially if you aren’t subjected to dex saves that often (seriously +2 difference in a very common save comes up *frequently* at my table, I don’t know what to say about it almost never coming up at yours. Statistical probabilities play out IRL in sometimes strange ways), or don’t see the blue in the teamwork aspects of the tactics that take advantage of the feat, that’s fine. Just means it’s not for you, barring houserule. </p><p></p><p>That doesn't make this a bad “ruling”.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 7418728, member: 6704184"] Let me just say fist, to everyone, that I dislike and have little respect for pedantry, and pretty much never consider semantics important outside of formal debate/academic discussions. So, if I come across as dismissive toward an argument, that is probably why. There is a word for that, already. Several, in fact. While I’ve no problem with people defining words differently, there is nothing restrictive about what I said. I’ve simply never encountered “cheese/cheesy/cheesing(the system/game)” being used to mean the same thing as “overpowered”, “broken”, or similar. I’ve only seen it used to suggest that a person is exploiting the system in a “cheesy” manner, ie, a manner that bends or perverts the intention of the thing being used. The “bag of rats” is cheese, counterspell is (in some opinions) overpowered. To some people, readying an action to cast dispel magic for when a caster casts a spell can be cheesy-bordering on outright cheating, especially if you exploit the wording and previous DM rulings about readied actions to abuse reaction timing, and effectively counterspell without having it prepared/known. I don’t see what is restrictive about the “cheese”/“overpowered” distinction. It just seems more useful than having them mean ge same thing, to me. Knocking people down after/instead of/as part of attacking has been useful in my group literally hundreds of times, between several editions. Doing it without sacrificing any attacks per round, which are *much* more important than your bonus action for nearly any S&B combatant in 5e, is very useful for any group that bothers to strategize as a group. If your group is too range heavy to benefit from it, then using it as you have been sounds rather counter to teamwork. Either you are imposing disadvantage on ally attacks in order to get advantage on your own, or you’re splitting fire to avoid that. I guarantee, even in a group that is mostly ranged, in an initiative where the enemy goes right after me, I can use the feat to destroy an enemy while the team is largely unharmed by them (assuming fight where shoving even works at all and we aren’t being swarmed, which just calls for very different tactics). Either I’m knocking them down and then moving away, because they are primarily melee, forcing them to either waste a turn dashing or use their less effective ranged attack while the team safely rains death, or I’m keeping the caster/archer from getting away from me by halving their effective speed per round. Without losing any attacks, which is a big deal for any character. Even a paladin or ranger usually won’t need to be using their bonus most rounds for other stuff, but giveng up a normal attack hurts. A feat that lets you get full use out of shoving without any loss in attack power, plus some defensive abilities, is really nice. yep. I’m not too worried about small changes that only really “hurt” in optimized games. So, the feat helps shore up a weakness in heavy armored characters, making them not dreadful at dex saves? Seems pretty good. You keep bringing up Resilient. Why do you think it’s relevant here? Does it make you better with a shield? It’s almost like different feats serve differing purposes! Crazy! if you want to be significantly better as succeeding on dex saves, you build for that, one way or another. If you want a small suite of shield benefits to help you better make use of a shield and better fulfill the image of a shield user in fantasy, you build for that. SM accomplishes the thing it’s built to do. If what it does isn’t interesting to you, especially if you aren’t subjected to dex saves that often (seriously +2 difference in a very common save comes up *frequently* at my table, I don’t know what to say about it almost never coming up at yours. Statistical probabilities play out IRL in sometimes strange ways), or don’t see the blue in the teamwork aspects of the tactics that take advantage of the feat, that’s fine. Just means it’s not for you, barring houserule. That doesn't make this a bad “ruling”. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Shield master on twitter
Top