D&D 5E Shield Mastery Feat

[KarinsDad]

PHB192 Actions in Combat: "The most common action to take in combat is the "Attack action", whether you are swinging a sword, firing an arrow from a bow, or brawling with your fists. With this action;
"you make one melee or ranged attack. See the "Making an Attack" section for rules that govern attacks."


PHB194 Making an Attack: "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."





Since a shove requires an attack role it can by itself initiate the "attack action" and according to these these rules it can also occur anywhere in the sequence.

So, in order to do an attack action, you have to make one melee or ranged attack, correct? Otherwise, it is not an attack action. To make a melee or ranged attack, you have to make an attack roll, correct? Otherwise, it is not an attack.

The problem for your interpretation is that the shove attack is gained by the attack action, but it doesn't occur if there is no attack action. The attack action has to occur. An attack roll from that particular action has to occur in order to trigger the shield mastery bonus action. Without the attack action and hence the attack roll, no shield bonus occurs. Horse before the cart.

Your interpretation seems to imply that just declaring an attack action is the same as making one.

 

[5ekyu]

So, in order to do an attack action, you have to make one melee or ranged attack, correct? Otherwise, it is not an attack action. To make a melee or ranged attack, you have to make an attack roll, correct? Otherwise, it is not an attack.

The problem for your interpretation is that the shove attack is gained by the attack action, but it doesn't occur if there is no attack action. The attack action has to occur. An attack roll from that particular action has to occur in order to trigger the shield mastery bonus action. Without the attack action and hence the attack roll, no shield bonus occurs. Horse before the cart.

Your interpretation seems to imply that just declaring an attack action is the same as making one.

Isnt the shove not an attack roll but an ability check? It can be aided by Guidance for instance but not bless.

"Instead of making an attack roll, you make a Strength (Athletics) check "

 

[Goblyn]

The character spent a feat to get this ability, and chars without the feat can shove as an action. Would an acceptable reading not be: the shield master's shove can be regarded as a bonus action instead of a regular action if she also decides to attack that round?

 

[5ekyu]

The character spent a feat to get this ability, and chars without the feat can shove as an action. Would an acceptable reading not be: the shield master's shove can be regarded as a bonus action instead of a regular action if she also decides to attack that round?

The rule allows you to get a bonus action to shove if you take the attack action. It does not strictly allow you to shove as a bonus action without (before) taking the attack action.

 

[Oofta]

The character spent a feat to get this ability, and chars without the feat can shove as an action. Would an acceptable reading not be: the shield master's shove can be regarded as a bonus action instead of a regular action if she also decides to attack that round?

Just to be clear, "If you're able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them."

So you can shove and make a melee attack, just not using your bonus action attack. Which, IMHO is just plain silly. Without being able to use it at any time, it's pretty much a waste of a feat.

But the real question is: can you use it to push thread necromancy off this site or are we doomed to forever visit old topics like The Flying Dutchman forever sailing the sea?

 

[KarinsDad]

But the real question is: can you use it to push thread necromancy off this site or are we doomed to forever visit old topics like The Flying Dutchman forever sailing the sea?

Probably not. I don't quite understand why people are so wrapped around the axle about thread necromancy. If someone doesn't want to read old threads, just don't do it (and especially don't post about it).

 

[KarinsDad]

Isnt the shove not an attack roll but an ability check? It can be aided by Guidance for instance but not bless.

"Instead of making an attack roll, you make a Strength (Athletics) check "

Sure. You make a special melee attack that replaces one of the attacks of the attack action. But, in order to do that special melee attack, you have to replace the attack roll with the Strength check. This doesn't change the fact that the attack action requires an attack which requires a roll, it's just a different type of roll because it is a different type of attack action.

 

[5ekyu]

Sure. You make a special melee attack that replaces one of the attacks of the attack action. But, in order to do that special melee attack, you have to replace the attack roll with the Strength check. This doesn't change the fact that the attack action requires an attack which requires a roll, it's just a different type of roll because it is a different type of attack action.

An "attack roll" is a specific thing, a distint thing from an "ability check" or a "saving throw" and generally speaking within 5e attempts to go round the elbow to get to the noggin to conflate and confound and construe one as the other tend to go badly.

The circumstances of a shove are pretty clearly defined in its rule.

The feat is not so clear to some for whatever reasons.

 

[Oofta]

Probably not. I don't quite understand why people are so wrapped around the axle about thread necromancy. If someone doesn't want to read old threads, just don't do it (and especially don't post about it).

I really just wanted to clarify that it can be used in place of one of the attacks, and that I think it's a silly rule that I disagree with.

I'd ask why it bothers you that it bothers me but then we'd get into this endless loop of why it bothers you that it bothers me that it bothers you. Does that bother you?

P.S. end of the day, I just don't think "if you take" requires a sequence of completed actions, and if it does other things break. That, and if you can't knock prone first the feat is pretty useless. Feel free to rule differently at your table.

 

[KarinsDad]

An "attack roll" is a specific thing, a distint thing from an "ability check" or a "saving throw" and generally speaking within 5e attempts to go round the elbow to get to the noggin to conflate and confound and construe one as the other tend to go badly.

The circumstances of a shove are pretty clearly defined in its rule.

The feat is not so clear to some for whatever reasons.

The feat seems totally clear to me. I think you are confusing a disagreement on the rule with a misunderstanding of the rule. Even Jeremy flip flopped on it.

As for the attack roll vs. the ability check, it's basically irrelevant to the rule question. Attack actions require attacks. Both a normal attack and a shove are attacks, shoves are just special melee attacks whereas normal attacks are normal melee or ranged attacks. The fact that a shove uses a different mechanic doesn't change the interpretation of the feat rule.