D&D 5E So...Multiattack

[Imaro]

So I originally believed multiattack in the Monster Manual could be used in the same way as extra attacks in the PHB... in other words you could give one up to grapple, shove, etc. However Mike Mearls has actually stated that multiattack is not in fact a subset of the attack action and thus is it's own thing and only allows the specified attacks under the ability to be used...

I'm curious if I was the only one using multiattack in that way? I'm also interested in hearing others opinions on whether they agree or disagree with Mearls and why. Personally I think I'm going to stick with my own interpretation since I'm having a hard time seeing the why (from a gameplay, drama and sim perspective) of Mearls take on it... but I'd still like to hear other takes on the why's as well...

 

[doctorhook]

Hmm, I hadn't even thought of that. I'd say Mearls' perspective makes sense possibly if we're discussing non-humanoid monsters, but shouldn't a hobgoblin with a sword have similar potential combat options as a human PC with a sword? Furthermore, what if, say, a gryphon decides to pounce on you like a lion would? Gryphons don't get a pounce action like lions do, so why can't they use shove?

Yeah, I think I'm leaning towards your interpretation.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

I also prefer your interpretation, and feel it makes monsters more dynamic. Plus I think the monster manual creatures are usually a bit on the weak side as it stands and dont have many options. We had some really interesting design in 4th edition, and while sometimes you just want a simple blob of hit points, AC of 10 +1d4 and an axe, other times you want more status effects and tactical choices.

 

[Rod Staffwand]

That's odd. When I ran 5e it worked the same as fighter multi-attacking and such. Monsters could replace individual attacks with other types of checks (grappling, shoving, etc.) if it was advantageous and/or interesting to do so.

It seems ridiculous that a dragon has to choose between potentially doing 50-60 points of damage or knocking someone prone. And with the vanilla bag-of-hit points monsters of 5e, opening up the combat system to more special options should only be encouraged.

The way I would run it: the dragon could replace an attack from their claw/claw/bite multiattack with a shove. Also, for shoves I allow an additional effect for each size category larger (prone or +5 feet to knockback). A gargantuan dragon could send a medium creature flying 15 feet and knock them prone on a successful check. Heck, if I was feeling frisky, I might allow them to make an attack at disadvantage to inflict damage AND get a shove. Sounds about right to me.

 

[TerraDave]

I just had some gargoyles grapple a character and start to fly away with him...using this interpretation and hence getting the multiple grapple chances with their claw bite multi-attack.

At higher levels, the Mearls interpretation would seem to really penalize the monsters, as I don't think they distinguish extra actions or attacks from multi-attack.

 

[Jeff Albertson]

Also, can monsters move between attacks when taking the Multiattack action?

 

[Jaelommiss]

I personally always allow multiattacking monsters to get multiple grapples or shoves in a turn. Nothing scares the party like a dragon making four successful grapples on a PC, each grabbing a separate limb, and them ripping the poor hero apart on the next turn.

(I allow a Str save contested by the dragon's athletics check. I'm not a total monster.)

 

[Kobold Stew]

My sense is that on this question Mearls is right (by which I mean more consistent with the rest of the rules, when measured against the alternative): some creatures have the multi attack ability, and can use it as their attack option. Thinking about it this way preserves the action economy, as it were, and means that multi attackers don't get multiple attempts to accomplish the same thing (such as a grapple) in the same turn.

Multiattack becomes a single coordinated attack (claw claw bite, any combination of which might strike home) not three separate and separable things.

 

[Sunseeker]

I think it's much more interesting when Multiattack is read as allowing a certain number of attacks per turn instead of only allowing specific attacks per turn, but I understand there are some balance issues with the former, given that a dragon could say, make 3 bite attacks, which do superior damage to claw attacks. I think there's certainly some situations where that is appropriate, but there's a real danger of power-gaming monsters, which may be appropriate for certain tables and situations, but using the best options isn't always the best option.

However, I use the "bonus action" for a lot of checks for monsters, it doesn't explicitly say they don't have it and it certainly powers them up a bit to be able to attack AND make checks.

 

[Celtavian]

I see. The PHB reads that you can only try grapple or shoving with one attack using the Attack action, not all of them. You sill get your other attacks if you do a shove or grapple, just not multiple grapple or shove attempts. That is sensible.