Also I voted with the clear majority.
I'm such a follower
Give in to the dark side. We have cookies!
Also I voted with the clear majority.
I'm such a follower
That sounds so limiting. As the DM, and I can give the monsters any sort of feature I want. It seems like such a waste of potential to give them what the players have.
Like, if I gave an NPC the Shield Master feat, he only gets to knock down one player. But if I give him the Booming Voice of Zeus, he can shout prone everyone around. And this is super easy. Took me a couple seconds. It's easier than giving him a feat or spell, even, since there's nothing for me to look up at any time.
Booming Voice of Zeus (recharge 5-6): bonus action, knocks prone everyone within 30 feet. DC 14 Strength save avoids.
Give in to the dark side. We have cookies!
Two simple solutions to this:As the DM... fun for whom? I don't like my monsters always being steamrolled by the fighter who knocks them down, attacks twice with advantage, and then lets half the party do the same.
I need my fun too. I want to take my turn in combat.
Which demonstrably makes that feat an inferior investment of an ASI. Making it not fun for the players.So, yeah, rule of fun is the same as rules as written: bonus action after the competition of the trigger. In this case, the trigger is pretty clearly "the attack action".
If I have to redesign most of my encounters because of a single option in a single feat, that rules option is broken.Two simple solutions to this:
a) More enemy units in battle, since you can only use that shield shove once per round, or
b) More Huge enemies, since shove can only be done to one size larger. If said Fighter wants to shove a Huge enemy, then the Wizard needs to invest a spell slot and their concentration on Enlarge.
Disagree.Which demonstrably makes that feat an inferior investment of an ASI. Making it not fun for the players.
Disagree.
The feat gives you a bonus to Dexterity saves, which is huge, and evasion via the shield, which is even better. Those two benefits alone are worth a feat.
Being able to shove as a bonus action, let alone shove and knockdown, is gravy. Heck, the main benefit of that is getting an enemy five feet away from your allies.
That so many people think being able to trip enemies BEFORE attacking is worth advocating this hard for, tells me that the options is probably too strong and is better off nerfed.
So all your encounters are an entire party against a single enemy of Large size or smaller?If I have to redesign most of my encounters because of a single option in a single feat, that rules option is broken.
Only against things that target only you. Most of the nasty and major DEX-save things target multiple party members. So, no, it's not "huge." It's situational at best.Disagree.
The feat gives you a bonus to Dexterity saves, which is huge,
It's a neat side benefit. Most definitely not worth a feat all by itself.and evasion via the shield, which is even better. Those two benefits alone are worth a feat.
That's ... an utterly worthless thing to do.Heck, the main benefit of that is getting an enemy five feet away from your allies.
Or maybe it's because putting the shove at the end of the entire attack action truly does make the feat not worth an ASI investment, and makes the sword-and-shield style pale even more in comparison to polearms, two-handed weapons and any and all ranged combat, all of which have feat support even better than a Shield Master that would let you knock prone and attack after.That so many people think being able to trip enemies BEFORE attacking is worth advocating this hard for, tells me that the options is probably too strong and is better off nerfed.
Based on what evidence?Without even having to look at the book. I can tell you that when gamers argue this hard that an option is fine and not game breaking and easy for a DM to work around... it usually needs to be hit by a +2 bar of nerfing.
I can tell you that when gamers argue this hard that an option is fine and not game breaking and easy for a DM to work around... it usually needs to be hit by a +2 bar of nerfing.
Based on every message board discussion I have had over an option in the last twenty years.Based on what evidence?