Shield mastery: 2 questions

[Ventruenox]

Mödley Crüe: Arguing logical fallacies and semantics is not the purpose of this thread. I'd rather not have to invoke the Charger feat's bonus action if I have to come running back here.

[langal]

{Scrubbed}

The Mod Life Crisis: FINAL NUDGE. REMAIN CIVIL, DO NOT ATTACK OTHER USERS, AND STAY ON TOPIC.

[Evaar]

So like...

Is there any reason the Dex Save bonus needs to be so limited? Would it have been a supremely overvalued feat had they just allowed you to apply your shield AC bonus to all Dex Saves, full stop?

I don't really understand the flavor that limit is trying to mechanically illustrate. Surely if your Dexterity was relevant to your ability to avoid injury from a thing, then your mastery of a sturdy object you can interpose between yourself and the thing is also relevant pretty much regardless of what that thing is.

Meanwhile Resilient (Dex) gives you a larger (usually) bonus to your Dex Save without caveats, plus a point of Dex. You lose the Bonus-Action-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named and the Evasion effect, but that seems like a pretty good deal on what is otherwise a pretty direct comparison.

[Keravath]

JC explained why this is wrong.

Taking an action means taking the action. Acting it out.

If you haven't done the thing yet, you haven't done it.

In other words, if you haven't rolled your attacks yet, you haven't taken the action.

You also cannot do 'part' of an action, do something else, and then go back to the action you were doing. The attack action has a specific exception to this allowing movement (and only movement) to occur between additional attacks.

There is no where, anywhere in the rules that I can find that in any way states or implies that you can not do "part" of an action.

1) Taking the cast a spell action. An opponent tries to counterspell you. You can use your reaction WHILE casting the spell to cast counterspell against the counterspell. Clearly casting a spell is not indivisible in at least some cases.

2) The attack action can be explicitly split up with movement between attacks. We ALSO have the general text on the timing of bonus actions.

"You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action's timing is specified, and anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action." PHB 189

If you have a bonus action available then you can take it at ANY time during your turn. ANY time includes between the attacks of the attack action since the bonus action can be taken ANY time and the rules do NOT say that you can not take actions, bonus actions or reactions while taking an action.

Examples:
Fighter/cleric: Attack, move, cast healing word as a bonus action, move, extra attack. This is perfectly legal by RAW.
Fighter/rogue: Attack, bonus action disengage, move, Attack OR Attack, move, bonus action hide, move, attack
Fighter/wizard: Attack, move (into line of sight of opponent with a held action attack), cast shield to protect from the attack, move, attack
Wizard: Cast fireball, opponent casts counterspell, wizard casts counterspell against the counterspell, wizard finishes casting fireball

These are all completely rules legal examples of using a bonus action or reaction at ANY time during the turn including during an ATTACK action.

If you have a rules citation indicating that Actions are indivisible and must be fully completed before other actions, reactions or bonus actions can be taken then please cite it.

[NaughtyTiger]

So like...

Is there any reason the Dex Save bonus needs to be so limited? Would it have been a supremely overvalued feat had they just allowed you to apply your shield AC bonus to all Dex Saves, full stop?

I don't really understand the flavor that limit is trying to mechanically illustrate. Surely if your Dexterity was relevant to your ability to avoid injury from a thing, then your mastery of a sturdy object you can interpose between yourself and the thing is also relevant pretty much regardless of what that thing is.

Meanwhile Resilient (Dex) gives you a larger (usually) bonus to your Dex Save without caveats, plus a point of Dex. You lose the Bonus-Action-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named and the Evasion effect, but that seems like a pretty good deal on what is otherwise a pretty direct comparison.

I don't know, a +1 magic shield (tier 2 item) gives you a full +3 to dex saves, that is pretty powerful. +3 shields exist, so +5 to all dex saves is pretty strong. my sword and board in plate was fairly happy with evasion, shove, and a moderate dex save boost. it let him put resilience in wisdom instead.

[Evaar]

I don't know, a +1 magic shield (tier 2 item) gives you a full +3 to dex saves, that is pretty powerful. +3 shields exist, so +5 to all dex saves is pretty strong. my sword and board in plate was fairly happy with evasion, shove, and a moderate dex save boost. it let him put resilience in wisdom instead.

It is pretty good, but Resilient Dex would give you proficiency bonus which pretty well keeps up or - more likely - surpasses what you'd get, depending on the generosity of your DM. And that's without the opportunity cost of having to use a shield, or the circumstance of potentially not having your shield equipped. So I still think the save bonus is a tad weaker even if it applies to everything.

So that would leave us comparing, basically, +1 dex to the combo Evasion and a finicky Shove option. At a glance, I can't clearly say that one of those is better than the other. It would depend on the character and what they do. And to me, that sounds like balance.

[ad_hoc]

2) The attack action can be explicitly split up with movement between attacks. We ALSO have the general text on the timing of bonus actions.

Yes, like I said, it's an exception to the general.

If all actions can be split up then why is there a rule specifically allowing movement (and only movement) to split up the attack action?

Isn't that a stupid rule then?

Just because the rules don't say that you can't do something doesn't mean you can. If that were the case then countless things must be allowed.

[Aimeryan]

The shove has been argued to death in the other thread(s) about it - I'll leave my answer to it as previously posted there.

As for the general argument about what is RAW about action atomicity, it is, as it has been and likely will remain to be, up to the DM. There is no rule as written. Not for. Not against. Not written.

[ad_hoc]

The shove has been argued to death in the other thread(s) about it - I'll leave my answer to it as previously posted there.

As for the general argument about what is RAW about action atomicity, it is, as it has been and likely will remain to be, up to the DM. There is no rule as written. Not for. Not against. Not written.

Unless we count 2 things:

1. The way the game/rules are structured to be exception based.
2. What Jeremy Crawford has told us.

[NaughtyTiger]

Unless we count 2 things:

1. The way the game/rules are structured to be exception based.
2. What Jeremy Crawford has told us.

counterpoint"

If we count 2 things:

1. The way the game/rules are structured to be exception based.
2. What Jeremy Crawford has told us.

cuz JC has flip flopped on everything, and it is reasonable that "bonus actions can be taken at any time" applies to mid-action.

[Aimeryan]

Unless we count 2 things:

1. The way the game/rules are structured to be exception based.
2. What Jeremy Crawford has told us.

Neither of those impact what is written in the PHB/DMG. The first is subjective interpretation of what is tangentially written, the second is non-official and would not be what is written, regardless. DM rulings must be applied.

[ad_hoc]

Neither of those impact what is written in the PHB/DMG. The first is subjective interpretation of what is tangentially written, the second is non-official and would not be what is written, regardless. DM rulings must be applied.

Well if we disregard #1 then literally everything not explicitly spelled out in the rules is a "rule".

The spelled out rule of having movement be available during an attack action also make no sense under this interpretation. If we're saying the rules say we can freely split up actions then why is there a rule giving a limited ability to split up a specific action? That makes no sense.

There are a lot of mental gymnastics going on to make the game more complicated and Shield Master a more powerful feat.

[langal]

The fact that JC has ruled it both ways...and then come out and said that he himself rules it a third way - makes all three methods completely acceptable. I wouldn't argue with a DM if he or she had the shove before/after/ or in-between. I would say that Shield Master is rather lackluster (if compared to some of the other feats) if ruled the "official" way. PM and GWM are just so much sexier. I would guess that most martials were still taking GWM and PM over SM even when the official ruling was the most lenient.

[Stone-Ears]

I have a fighter with the Shield Master feat and I'm relatively new to not playing something that's focused solely on magic (although I'm an eldritch knight so not quitting magic cold turkey yet). This thread has been somewhat helpful. But I would like to know what are some non-spell effects that requires a Dex save?

As for the shove thing. It always seemed logical to me that a fighter, especially one who is an expert on using a shield, would be putting himself in the best position to succeed whenever possible. Which means leading with an attempted shove before trying to attack with a sword is a perfectly valid action. It's not game breaking as it can only be done on one combatant at a time and isn't even guaranteed to succeed if you're fighting something that is also strong. Isn't it supposed to be a skill vs skill battle. Strength vs Strength? or Strength vs Dexterity.

I'm fortunate, though, that my DM also sees it this way and allows me to shove before I try to stab the poor soul that's fighting me

Any answers to help a newbie fighter with Shield Master feat is greatly appreciated!

[Zhorn]

But I would like to know what are some non-spell effects that requires a Dex save?

I find the use of the dex save thing comes down to the DM's style of traps more often than not.
Dex saves for traps are pretty much the default, do if your dm uses a fair amount of them and they target the person who hit the trigger, Shield Master's defensive value starts to increase a fair bit.

[Stone-Ears]

I find the use of the dex save thing comes down to the DM's style of traps more often than not.
Dex saves for traps are pretty much the default, do if your dm uses a fair amount of them and they target the person who hit the trigger, Shield Master's defensive value starts to increase a fair bit.

So far, my DM hasn't laid on the traps yet so I don't know if he likes to use them or not. But that is a great answer! I could see how being a shield master could be advantageous for being the one to trigger traps.

[stoutstien]

Don't forget that it is a reasonable ruling that if any aoe spell that calls for a Dex save that only has you in the target area can be considered single target for that case.

[Pex]

My barbarian/fighter gets to shove then attack. It saves me from having to Reckless Attack all the time, though I do it occasionally such as round 1 when I have to use my bonus action to rage. A few times I've used it to push instead of trip. I get my moments of awesomeness. I'm happy. The other players are happy. The DM is happy. I'm not winning the game with it. It's fine.

[Stone-Ears]

Exactly, it isn't an overwhelmingly strong feat to begin with. It's just one that could help a fighter fight one thing and it's not even guaranteed at that

[Aimeryan]

Well if we disregard #1 then literally everything not explicitly spelled out in the rules is a "rule".

The spelled out rule of having movement be available during an attack action also make no sense under this interpretation. If we're saying the rules say we can freely split up actions then why is there a rule giving a limited ability to split up a specific action? That makes no sense.

There are a lot of mental gymnastics going on to make the game more complicated and Shield Master a more powerful feat.

No. Once again, nothing is written about this. Not for, not against. We are not saying anything about what the rules say about this - there are no rules about this.

You can make whatever subjective interpretations of tangentially-relevant text you want and then decide on a rule from there - that is what it means to be a DM ruling.

[ad_hoc]

As for the shove thing. It always seemed logical to me that a fighter, especially one who is an expert on using a shield, would be putting himself in the best position to succeed whenever possible. Which means leading with an attempted shove before trying to attack with a sword is a perfectly valid action. It's not game breaking as it can only be done on one combatant at a time and isn't even guaranteed to succeed if you're fighting something that is also strong. Isn't it supposed to be a skill vs skill battle. Strength vs Strength? or Strength vs Dexterity.

The character doesn't know it is a game though.

The player knows which is stronger, sure.

The fighter though only gets an extra chance to shove after they have opened up their opponent by attacking them.

A wizard also knows it is stronger to continue casting 3rd level spells rather than 1st level ones. That doesn't mean they are able to.

[ad_hoc]

No. Once again, nothing is written about this. Not for, not against. We are not saying anything about what the rules say about this - there are no rules about this.

You can make whatever subjective interpretations of tangentially-relevant text you want and then decide on a rule from there - that is what it means to be a DM ruling.

There is also no rule that says a candle must be lit to give off light.

{Scrubbed}

[Stone-Ears]

The character doesn't know it is a game though.

The player knows which is stronger, sure.

The fighter though only gets an extra chance to shove after they have opened up their opponent by attacking them.

A wizard also knows it is stronger to continue casting 3rd level spells rather than 1st level ones. That doesn't mean they are able to.

An experienced fighter would know what is the optimal course of action for him/her based on their previous combat experience. So they would also be a fairly good judge of what is stronger. Obviously they wouldn't be trying to knock something bigger than Large down with a shield. It wouldn't make too much sense to do that. A muscle bound ogre might give a shove happy fighter pause if he isn't sure that he could actually win a contest of strength.

As for the extra chance to shove after attacking, that is one interpretation of what the rules say. But logically, there's no reason why a fighter would not be able to lead with a shield bash in an attempt to gain advantage. Especially if he's trained in handling a shield and is a master of it, as they would be when taking the shield master feat.

In your example, the wizard knows his limitations so obviously he's not going to spam 3rd level spells if he's unable to. The characters would likely be very in tune to what they can or cannot do anyhow.

[ad_hoc]

In your example, the wizard knows his limitations so obviously he's not going to spam 3rd level spells if he's unable to. The characters would likely be very in tune to what they can or cannot do anyhow.

Why doesn't the fighter also have limitations?

The fighter knows what is better. The fighter knows attacking 10 times is better than 2. That doesn't mean the fighter can do it.

[Keravath]

Well if we disregard #1 then literally everything not explicitly spelled out in the rules is a "rule".

The spelled out rule of having movement be available during an attack action also make no sense under this interpretation. If we're saying the rules say we can freely split up actions then why is there a rule giving a limited ability to split up a specific action? That makes no sense.

There are a lot of mental gymnastics going on to make the game more complicated and Shield Master a more powerful feat.

Well if they didn't spell out the example and clarification about movement being allowed between taking the attack action and any additional attacks allowed by an extra attack class capability then you would have folks arguing that the attack action is atomic and you have to take any attacks you have at the same time. By adding the clarification showing that movement is possible, the rules make clear that the attack action is not atomic and that other events can occur between attacks during an attack action.

That is certainly a completely valid interpretation and is probably as valid as a DM ruling that the only thing that can be done between attacks is move.

However, I do think that this ruling breaks the general rule that allows bonus actions to be taken at ANY time during the turn since I don't see any rules citation or logic that should prevent a player from making an attack, moving so they are in range of a downed team mate, casting healing word, then moving out of range of the team mate to make a second attack. There is nothing in the rules that should prevent this sequence of events except the unfounded belief that the attack action is atomic. The bonus action can be taken at ANY time if available and ANY time includes between separate attacks of the attack action.

On the other hand, ONE attack by itself IS atomic. You roll a d20 and resolve the attack. If there were any reactions or held actions triggered by the attack then they happen after the attack roll has been made. The shield spell contains specific wording allowing it to modify whether the attack hit or miss but the attack has still happened. However, separate attacks which are components of the attack action would not appear to be atomic given that you can move and use bonus actions between them. However, this is up to the individual DM to resolve as they choose.

[NaughtyTiger]

There are a lot of mental gymnastics going on to make the game more complicated

this statement suggests that the "declare attack, bonus action prone, complete attack" are intentionally twisting the words to power game. it suggests dishonesty. i find that insinuation offensive.

when i started the game,everyone that i played with interpreted shield master as "declare attack, bonus action prone, complete attack"
that was the instinct of how we read it. no gymnastics, no extensive arguments about grammar.
lots of people asked JC about it, no gymnastics
JC was cool with it for a couple of years, no gymnastics.

There is also no rule that says a candle must be lit to give off light.

a straw golem is a low CR opponent.

On the other hand, ONE attack by itself IS atomic. You roll a d20 and resolve the attack. If there were any reactions or held actions triggered by the attack then they happen after the attack roll has been made.

aw nuts, you brought this discussion back, too. for the record, i disagree that this is specified in the text, but it is a perfectly valid interpretation.

[Stone-Ears]

Why doesn't the fighter also have limitations?

The fighter knows what is better. The fighter knows attacking 10 times is better than 2. That doesn't mean the fighter can do it.

Is there anything in what I said that implies the fighter doesn't have limitations? Obviously they do. Attacking 10 times in a 6-second span would be supremely overpowered. The game already has limitations for that. The fighter would also be aware of his limitations. That's the point. Almost every character, except for the ones that are oblivious to it, would know their limitations and would act accordingly.

[AHF]

. But I would like to know what are some non-spell effects that requires a Dex save?

A few examples:

Mud Breath Ability of Mud Mephit
Slowing Ray of a Mindwitness
Disintegrate Ray of a Zombie Beholder

There aren’t a lot of them among monster stat blocks. The area effect abilities tend to trigger dex saves while the individual effects more often trigger con saves.

[Stone-Ears]

A few examples:

Mud Breath Ability of Mud Mephit
Slowing Ray of a Mindwitness
Disintegrate Ray of a Zombie Beholder

There aren’t a lot of them among monster stat blocks. The area effect abilities tend to trigger dex saves while the individual effects more often trigger con saves.

A zombie beholder doesn't sound like it would be too friendly.

Thanks for the answers man! Honestly, I picked up shield master just because I wanted to have a fighter that's actually good with a shield beyond what is normal.

[Chronos]

A fifth-level fighter attacks the orc right next to him, and finishes it off. He then moves towards another orc, 30' away. But unbeknownst to him, there's a hidden pit trap between the two orcs, and he falls in. The game now comes screeching to a halt, because he hasn't finished his attack action yet, and until he does, nothing else can happen.