NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7552976" data-attributes="member: 6919838">So much - let's be generous- apparent confusion in this I hardly know where to begin."I understand that Crawford thinks that a master of shield tactics shoving with a shield requires that you also swing a sword at somebody. "Actually as JEC has said, you can shove with a shield without swinging a sword at them first - its represented in the rules as using an attack to shove. Everytime someone paints this as a question of "can I use shove first?" they are doing or revealing either confusion orbintentionsl misdirection. If you can take the attack action and your target is legal to shove then you can shove... as an attack as part of the attack sction.What is being defined here is when you can by dint of this feat get allowed a bonus action shove in addition to an attack action.As for tautology... again you said you did not see a reason why it was limited to go with attack actions and I pointed out why I thought this feat and others made a fairly consistent case of limiting bonus sction offense to only getting granted whrn you took an offensive bonus action as well. To me, not opening up willy nilly offensive bonus at-wills with non-offensive actions seems really good and sound design. If it doesnt to you, if that's in the list of reasons you dismissed as not worth noting, that's fine - we play very different gsmes.As for the power of shove vs the power of attacks, the games I run are not solo games but gtoup gsmes and so there I'd not this overly simplistic accounting of who will get up before whom that says that a shove at the end of your action is gonna be useless. In fact, I have seen shoves in a group setting to be very strong. A strong shove character getting a bonus shove st the end of their attacks can knock down a foe, often a weaker foe, allowing another to strike with advsantage and that can be big if the follow-up guy has some heavy damage potential like smites or sneak or even special effects like hex or maybe their attack hits the vulnerabilities. I recall fondly a session where my character handed the only-dagger-that-mattered to the hulking cleric-warrior and the used help to let her hit, falling the foe.If I had been a bonus action shove built character, it could have been stronger giving her multiple shots with advantage over the turn.Net result is this, in a group game, shove is a support move, not a damage move and can be if used well and with planning as or more powerful than an attack. Too often "analysis" is skewed by focusing on events as if it's a one-on-one fight, when the game was designed for group play."Shove is clearly a less powerful ability than an attack is in general -- this is easy to judge just by comparing the number of shoves to the number of attack rolls that occur in your games "That's just faulty logic. Firebolt is cast more often than fireball but that doesnt mean firebolt is more powerful. A single shove can allow multiple effects over the turn - setting up advantage strikes, setting up disadvtantage on the downed foe opportunity attack helping escapes or end runs, even simply removing a partial cover issue for friendly attacks against those behind the now prone foe... not to mention movement reduction in cases where that matters. It's kind of like say "casting bless" vs using the help action. Bless gives multiple allies bonuses to hit and save over multiple turns - to every attack. Help gives one character one attack at advantage. You can likely "help" more than you can cast bless and hey, for one attack only, help may seem more powerful, but bless is overall gonna add a lot more to that combat if used when it matters than help will in spite of it being cast as an action less often.But we dont have to agree... After all, maybe your game sees more solo fights where an end of turn bonus shove **is** actually pointless. Maybe in your games the state of tactical play does lead shoves to be seen as somehow weak sauce when it comes to tools that help win fights. If so, maybe lots of house rules help that work out great for you.Me? Not do much. I disagree with the "indivisible action" part of the various JEC rulings, but I see a great deal of sense and good for the game results in the "attack action" (at least one attack) being required before you earn your bonus attacks for the cases where it is required.***One last bit... it's just not true that a rule has to be preventing game breaking for it to be needed or good for the game. If you want to set the bar for *I am right unless it can be proven I break the game* that's fine, but I find there to be a whole lot more nuance and sophistication to games and rules than someone's idea of broken or not. I use cooking analogies frequently and for instance my burger for supper is not "broken and rendered inedible" if I dont add sauteed mushrooms - but it sure is to me better with them. My cream sauces are not broken without nutmeg, but they are not as good. Same for games - D&D is likely not broken without the Bless spell or the barbarian class- but it's better with them - to my tastes.But you enjoy your games, like I will enjoy mine.</blockquote>

Verification